THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION 

By  J.  L.  NEVE,  D.  D, 


mtl)eCtt)c>ofi^etogorh 


LIBRARY 


This  book  is  due  two  weeks  from  the  last  date 
stamped  below,  and  if  not  j;eturned  or  renewed  at  or 
before  that  time  a  fine  of  five  cents  a  day  will  be  incurred. 


!lJ9n*A3 


THE 

Augsburg  Confession 

A  BRIEF  REVIEW  OF  ITS  HISTORY 

AND 

AN  INTERPRETATION  OF  ITS 
DOCTRINAL  ARTICLES 

WITH 

INTRODUCTORY  DISCUSSIONS  ON  CONFESSIONAL 
QUESTIONS, 

By 
J.    L.   NEVE,    D.D., 

Professor  of  Symbolics  and  History  of  Doctrines  in  the 

Hamma  Di-vinity  School  of  Wittenberg  College^ 

in  Springfieldj   Ohio. 


Philadelphia,  Pa. 
The  Lutheran  Publication  Society 


Exchanfje 

^^'^3  0  77 

Copyright,  1914,  by 
The  Lutheran  Publication  Society 


PREFACE 

A  number  of  years  ago,  when  the  new  introduction  to 
J.  T.  Mueller's  "Symbolische  Buecher,"  written  by  Pro- 
fessor Kolde,  of  Erlangen,  appeared,  giving  us  a  bird's- 
eye  view  of  the  present  status  of  research  regarding  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  the  writer  went  to  work  and  se- 
cured all  the  necessary  source  material  for  writing  more 
extensively  a  critical  introduction  to  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. The  story  which  Dr.  Kolde  had  told  on  thirty 
pages  the  writer  wanted  to  tell  more  in  detail  and  yet  in 
such  a  way  that  the  student  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
would  find  all  the  available  information  without  being 
confused.  This  work  was  finished  in  German  at  the  time 
when  the  ''Confessional  History  of  the  Lutheran  Church" 
by  Dr.  J.  W.  Richard  was  published.  Soon,  also,  the 
''Confessional  Principle  and  the  Confessions  of  the 
Lutheran  Church"  by  Drs.  T.  E.  Schmauk  and  T.  Benze 
appeared.  These  works,  like  the  one  which  the  writer 
had  prepared,  were  written  in  the  technical  form  of 
theological  research.  This  kept  him  from  publishing  his 
work  at  that  time. 

,  But,  on  the  basis  of  this  work,  is  now  presented  a  book 
on  the  Augsburg  Confession  that  has  been  prepared  with 
regard  for  the  taste  of  the  common  reader  who  does 
not  care  for  the  more  detailed  investigations  in  the 
technical  language  of  the  theologians.  The  main  stress 
in  this  book  is  not  upon  the  history  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  but  upon  the  interpretation  of  its  text,  its 
articles.  It  is  prefaced  by  a  chapter  with  simple  talks  on 
confessional  questions,  which  is  especially  dedicated  to 
our  laymen.  It  is  an  attempt  to  answer  a  number  of 
questions  which  they  especially  have  in  mind,  and  en- 
deavors to  interest  them  in  the  study  of  the  confessional 
principles  contained  in  the  Confessions. 

The  second  part  of  the  book,  which  ofifers  a  brief  his- 
tory of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  confines  itself  to  telling 
the  story  of  the  Confession  in  a  readable  way  without 

I 


2  Pri^Faci:. 

aiming  at  any  scientific  form,  nor  giving  any  of  the 
proofs  from  the  sources  contained  in  the  manuscript  to 
which  reference  has  been  made.  It  is  hoped  to  pubhsh  this 
manuscript  also,  which  has  cost  so  very  much  labor,  if 
there  should  be  sufficient  interest  in  the  study  of  the  sub- 
ject. 

The  third  part,  with  its  interpretation  of  the  articles 
of  the  Confession,  forms  the  main  part  of  this  book. 
There,  also,  the  effort  has  been  made  to  write  in  such  a 
way  that  a  layman  with  some  education  can  follow  the 
discussions.  It  has  been  difficult  to  carry  out  this  inten- 
tion. It  would  have  been  easy  if  it  had  been  the  aim 
merely  to  preach  on  some  of  the  thoughts  of  the  Confes- 
sion, i3Ut  the  purpose  was  to  explain  each  article  accord- 
ing to  its  historical  meaning  in  a  connected  way.  If  this 
is  the  plan,  then  it  is  difficult  to  bring  these  theological 
principles,  upon  which  the  work  of  the  Reformation  was 
based,  within  the  understanding  of  readers  who  have  not 
had  the  opportunity  to  study  church  history.  The  Augs- 
burg Confession  is  different  from  the  Catechism.  It 
establishes  doctrinal  principles  and  rejects  the  positions 
of  Unitarianism,  Socinianism,  Pelagianism,  Semi-Pela- 
gianism,  Zwinglianism,  Anabaptism,  Donatism,  Nova- 
tianism.  Yet  the  writer  has  never  in  his  interpretation  of 
the  articles  assumed  the  knowledge  of  any  of  the  facts 
of  church  history,  but  has  always  tried  to  explain  them. 
Of  course,  theological  subjects  will  sometimes  dictate 
their  own  style,  especially  when  adequate  expressions  are 
aimed  at.  At  some  places  the  language  may  not  be  as 
simple  as  would  be  desirable.  But  in  order  even  here  to 
help  the  lay  reader  as  much  as  possible,  the  discussion 
has  been  put  in  the  form  of  questions  and  answers  and 
made  more  readable  by  presenting  it  in  divisions  and  sub- 
divisions. The  aim  of  this  book  is,  to  repeat,  to  make 
the  reader  familiar  with  all  the  leading  thoughts  of  the 
Confession  in  their  connections. 

For  this  reason,  the  professors  of  symbolics  in  Luth- 
eran theological  seminaries  may  find  that  they  can  use 
the  book  with  their  classes,  as  it  is  the  writer's  intention 
to  do.     While  it  aims  to  be  a  discussion  of  the  articles 


PRKr'ACi^.  3 

of  the  Augsburg  Confession  only,  yet  it  reaches  over  into 
the  other  Confessions  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  so  that 
with  some  aid  of  the  teacher,  on  the  basis  of  this  book, 
a  study  of  the  other  confessional  writings  of  the  Book 
of  Concord  could  be  carried  out. 

Because  of  the  frequent  references  to  the  other  Con- 
fessions of  our  Church  the  student  of  this  book  would  find 
it  profitable  to  purchase  a  copy  of  the  "People's  Edition" 
of  the  Book  of  Concord,  or  the  Symbolical  Books  of  the 
Evangelical  Lutheran  Church,  translated  from  the 
original  languages  by  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs.  Our  references 
follow  the  paging  of  this  book  which  was  published  by 
the  General  Council  Publication  Board  in  Philadelphia, 
but  which  can  be  procured  from  any  publication  house 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  this  country. 

The  interpretation  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  the 
third  part  of  this  book  covers  only  the  first  twenty-one 
articles,  which  give  the  doctrinal  foundations  of  the 
Lutheran  Church.  The  last  seven  articles  on  abuses  have 
been  given  in  text  only.  Yet  some  of  the  passages  of 
these  last  seven  articles,  that  are  of  practical  interest  for 
the  Church  to-day  have  been  treated  in  connection  with 
articles  of  the  first  part.  So,  for  instance,  the  passage  on 
Sunday,  in  Article  XXVIII,  is  discussed  in  connection 
with  Article  XV. 

To  make  the  study  more  practical,  the  aim  has  been 
always  to  state  which  denominations  of  to-day  are  hold- 
ing the  positions  rejected  at  the  close  of  each  article. 
Thus  some  elements  of  comparative  symbolics  have  been 
injected  for  the  practical  information  of  the  reader. 

Here  the  writer  could  close  his  introduction.  But  he 
has  yet  something  in  mind.  While  writing  this  book  he 
has  been  thinking  of  the  education  of  our  laymen  for 
work  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  Laymen's  Movement 
has  brought  our  laymen  to  the  front.  The  intelligent 
laymen  of  our  Church,  all  over  the  land,  get  into  touch 
with  each  other  at  large  conventions,  and  so  their  influ- 
ence will  be  felt  in  many  things  pertaining  to  the  course 
of  development  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  this  coun- 
try.    The  better  their  religious  education  is,  the  safer 


4  PrKFacE. 

their  leadership  will  be.  In  the  Fatherland,  one  of  the 
aims  of  Inner  Missions  has  been  to  train  laymen  for 
leadership  in  the  Church.  They  have  schools  for  train- 
ing deacons  (''Bniederanstalten' ) .  The  laymen,  just  as 
well  as  the  pastor,  should  visit  the  sick,  the  poor.  The 
laymen  should  be  able  to  meet  the  objections  of  unbelief, 
to  conduct  prayer  meetings,  young  people's  meetings, 
Sunday  schools.  But  to  be  able  to  do  this  in  the  spirit 
of  their  Church,  an  education  is  needed.  The  minister 
of  the  Gospel  needs  the  education  of  the  theological 
seminary.  So  the  layman,  as  a  deacon  in  the  Church,  or 
as  a  leader  of  any  kind  in  the  Church,  needs  a  training 
in  a  laymen's  seminary.  He  should  study  church  history 
so  that  he  can  explain  historically  the  churches  and  the 
religious  tendencies  by  which  our  own  Church  is  sur- 
rounded. This  should  be  done  under  the  guide  of  a 
text-book  prepared  for  this  special  purpose,  a  book  that 
should  be  practical  in  every  respect.  Such  laymen's 
seminary  should  also  offer  a  thorough  study  of  Luther's 
Catechism  and  the  Augsburg  Confession.  With  regard 
to  Biblical  studies,  not  only  should  the  contents  of  the 
Bible  be  studied,  as  in  the  men's  classes  of  the  Sunday 
school,  but  also  the  leading  principles  of  interpretation 
should  be  taught.  Instruction  might,  also,  be  given  with 
regard  to  practical  questions  of  the  Church.  A  layman's 
seminary  with  such  courses  would  enable  many  of  the 
members  of  our  congregations  to  do  valuable  work  in  the 
congregations  to  which  they  belong.  In  our  country 
the  situation  of  the  Lutheran  Church  is  peculiar.  Here 
Lutherans  do  not  live  by  themselves  in  states,  as  in 
Germany,  but  are  surrounded  by  all  the  other  denomina- 
tions. By  intermarriage,  and  in  many  other  ways,  the 
influences  of  the  other  denominations  reach  into  our 
congregations.  They  lose  their  identity  as  Lutheran 
congregations  and  become  strangers  to  the  rich  heritage 
of  their  fathers.  All  simply  because  our  members  have 
not  been  educated.  A  knowledge  has  been  kept  from 
them  which  they  would  appreciate  so  much.  If  in  any 
country,  then  it  is  here  in  America  that  our  laymen  need 
a  training  in  the  faith  and  in  the  spirit  of  our  own  Church, 


Prkfack.  5 

in  order  to  find  the  path  in  which  a  healthy  development 
of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  America  lies.  Our  laymen 
need  a  discerning  eye  with  respect  to  the  influences  that 
are  at  work  about  us  to  break  down  or  to  push  into  the 
background  the  principles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
which  are  fundamental  to  the  life  of  our  Church.  We 
cannot  here  go  into  details,  but  read  in  the  third  part  of 
this  book  the  interpretation  of  Articles  II,  on  Original 
Sin;  IV  and  VI,  on  the  relation  between  Justification 
and  Sanctification ;  V,  IX,  and  X  on  the  Means  of  Grace. 

The  question  will  be  asked :  How  could  the  Church 
arrange  for  such  laymen's  seminaries?  In  localities 
where  there  are  many  Lutheran  congregations  in  a  neigh- 
borhood, such  schools  could  be  conducted  in  the  form 
of  institutes,  with  able  pastors  as  teachers.  Where 
this  is  impracticable,  as  in  the  West,  where  frequently 
Lutherans  live  far  apart,  the  local  pastor  could  be  the 
teacher  of  such  a  school.  With  two  hours  the  week 
(prayer  meeting  included ;  such  schools  need  not  be  con- 
fined to  men  only),  a  great  work  could  be  done.  If  such 
a  continuous  instruction  should  go  through  a  period  of 
one  or  two  years,  it  would  mean  something  for  the  char- 
acter of  a  congregation.  Wlien  men  begin  to  know  their 
Church  and  see  how  Scriptural  and  evangelical  her  prin- 
ciples are,  then  they  begin  to  love  her.  Such  members 
give  color  and  character  to  a  church. 

The  book  which  is  here  presented  is  intended  as  a 
text-book  for  classes  of  laymen,  unth  the  pastor  teaching. 
The  work  can  be  taken  up  in  Luther  League  meetings; 
also  in  such  laymen's  seminaries.  Here  and  there  may 
be  a  paragraph  that  will  at  first  reading  be  understood 
better  by  the  teacher  than  by  the  student.  This  is  due 
to  the  nature  of  the  subject.  But  the  teacher,  with  his 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  the  Church  and  the  setting 
of  the  doctrines  of  our  Church,  can  explain  it  all  to  his 
students. 

May  the  Head  of  the  Church  guide  this  book  on  its 
mission ! 

Thi^  Author. 


CONTENTS 


PART  ONE   (Introductory). 
SIMPLE  TALKS  ON  CONFESSIONAL  QUESTIONS. 

PAGS 

I.     Can  we  think  of  a  cliurch  without  a  creed? ii 

II.     What  would  be  the  dangers  of  a  church  without  a 

creed?    • I3 

III.  When  only  can  our  Confessions  offer  us  a  safe- 

guard against  errors  ?  14 

IV.  What    is   the   relation   of   the    Confessions   to   the 

Scriptures  ?     15 

V.  Is  our  Lutheran  Church  right  in  making  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,  which  was  written  in  the  six- 
teenth century,  the  guide  for  men  who  live  in  the 

twentieth  century  ?     17 

VI.     How  do  the  Confessions  appear  when  we  consider 
the  causes  which  brought  them  into  existence  and 
the  conditions  which  led  to  their  adoption?   ....         21 
VII.     Does  the  appreciation  and  the  study  of  creeds  inter- 
fere with  a  truly  religious  life  of  individuals  and 

churches  ?    24 

VIII.     How  will  the  knowledge  of  and  the  adherence  to 
the  principles  of  a  creed  aid  a  preacher  and  a 

teacher  of  the  Christian  religion?  27 

IX.     Why  is  the  Apostles'  Creed  not  enough?   32 

X.     Why  is  Luther's  Small  Catechism  not  enough  ?   . .         35 
XL    What  is  the  Form  of  Concord,  and  what  should  be 

our  attitude  towards  it  ?    35 

PART  TWO. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 

1.  Growth  of  the  cause  of  the  Reformation,  37 

2.  The  situation  becomes  critical,  38 

3.  But  once  more  the  arm  of  the  Emperor  was  checked. 

The  Augsburg  Diet  is  called,  38 

4.  Two   important  colloquies,    39 

a.  The  Schwabach  x\rticles. 

b.  The  Marburg  Articles. 

5.  Melanchthon's  work  of  writing  the  Confession,  40 

a.  The  first  plan. 

7 


8  Contents. 

PAG^ 

b.  What  convinced  Melanchthon  that  also  articles  of 

doctrine  should  be  submitted? 

c.  The  first  draft  is  sent  to  Luther. 

d.  How  did  the  first  draft  compare  with  the  Confes- 

sion as  it  was  finally  delivered? 

e.  The   confessional   document   which    Melanchthon 

had  been  preparing  exclusively  in  the  name  of 
the  Elector  of  Saxony  becomes,  by  agreement 
of  the  several  Estates,  the  common  Confession 
of  all  the  Lutherans  at  Augsburg, 

6.  The  arrival  of  the  Emperor,   44 

7.  The  opening  of  the  Diet,  45 

8.  The   situation,    45 

9.  The  deliver}^  of  the  Confession 45 

a.  Attempts  to  prevent  a  public  reading. 

b.  The  public  reading  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

c.  What  was  the  effect  of  this  reading 

(1)  upon  the  Emperor? 

(2)  upon  the  other  Catholics? 

(3)  upon  the  Lutherans  themselves? 

10.  Defending  the  Confession,   48 

a.  A  Confession  of  the  Romanists   (Confutation). 

b.  The  answer  of  the  Lutherans  (Apology). 

11.  A  brief  review  of  the  history  of  the  texts  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession,    51 

a.  What    became    of    the    two    copies    delivered    at 

Augsburg? 

(i)  What  became  of  the  German  text? 

(2)  What  became  of  the  Latin  text? 

b.  What  text,  then,  is  it  which  we  use  in  our  Eng- 

lish Lutheran  churches? 

c.  Is  there  a  way  for  us  to  find  out  how  the  first 

publication  of  Melanchthon  (of  1530)  compares 
with  those  official  copies  delivered  at  the  Diet? 

d.  What  do  we  find  when  we  make  the  comparison? 

e.  The  "altered"  edition  of  1540. 

12.  A  few  remarks  on  the  history  of  the  significance  of 

the  Augsburg  Confession,   53' 

a.  What  was  the  significance  of  the  Confession  dur- 

ing the  time  from  the  Diet  at  Augsburg  (1530) 
up  to  the  Religious  Peace  Treaty  of  Augsburg 

(1555)? 

b.  What  was  the  significance  of  the  Confession  from 

155=;  up  to  the  end  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War, 
1648? 

c.  What  has  been  the  significance  of  the  Confession 

from  the  end  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  (1648) 
on  up  to  our  day? 


Contents.  9 

PART  THREE. 

AN  INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  ARTICLES  OF  THE 
AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 

PAC^ 

Preface  to  the  Emperor  Charles  V.,    59 

I.    Chief  Articlks  of  Faith. 

I.    Of  God,   61 

II.     Of  Original  Sin 66 

III.  Of  the  Son  of  God,   74 

IV.  Of  Justification,    79 

V.     Of  the  Ministry  of  the  Church,  84 

VI.     Of  New  Obedience,  87 

VII.     Of  the  Church,  90 

VIII.    What  the  Church  is,  95 

IX.     Of  Baptism,   96 

X.     Of  the  Lord's  Supper,   100 

XI.     Of  Confession,    106 

XII.     Of  Repentance 108 

XIII.  Of  the  Use  of  the  Sacraments,  112 

XIV.  Of  Ecclesiastical  Orders,   114 

XV.     Of  Ecclesiastical  Rites,    116 

XVI.     Of  Civil  Matters 120 

XVII.     Of  the  Return  of  Christ  to  Jr  igm-ent,    122 

XVIII.     Of  Free  Will,   125 

XIX.     Of  the  Cause  of   Sin 133 

XX.     Of  Faith  and  Good  Works,  136 

XXI.     Of  the  Worship  of  Saints,  _ 140 

Conclusion  to  the  Articles  of  Faith,   142 

II.    Articles   in   which   are   Enumerated   the   Abuses  Cor- 
rected. 

XXII.     Of  Both  Kinds,    143 

XXIII.  Of  the  Marriage  of  Priests,  144 

XXIV.  Of  the  Mass,  145 

XXV.     Of  Confession,    148 

XXVI.     Of  the  Distinction  of  Meats  and  of  Traditions,  148 

XXVIL     Of  Monastic  Vows,   151 

XXVIII.     Of  Ecclesiastical  Power,    155 

Epilogue,    160 


THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION 

PART  I 

(INTRODUCTORY) 

Simple  Talks  on  Confessional 
Questions 

I.     Can  we  think  of  a  Church  without  a  Creed? 

This  is  impossible.  The  so-called  ''Christian"  Church 
(Campbellites)  uses  the  motto:  "No  creed  but  Christ." 
But  when  the  people  of  this  Church  think  that  they  have 
no  creed,  they  deceive  themselves.  They  have  pro- 
nounced convictions  on  quite  a  number  of  Christian  doc- 
trines. For  instance,  they  reject  infant  baptism,  and 
they  insist  upon  immersion  as  an  essential  thing.  In 
this  they  distinguish  themselves  from  many  other  de- 
nominations. Now  in  taking  such  a  doctrinal  position, 
do  they  not,  after  all,  give  expression  to  a  creed?  Do 
they  not  confess  something  in  which  they  believe  as  a 
denomination  ? 

Some,  feeling  the  inconsistency  of  admitting  that  they 
belong  to  a  special  denomination,  and  yet  insisting  that 
they  have  no  creed,  have  thought  out  another  way  of 
escaping  the  charge  that  they  are  believers  in  a  creed. 
Let  us  explain  this  by  relating  a  conversation  which  we 
once  had  with  a  young  man  on  a  train.  We  were  sharing 
one  seat  and  were  both  returning  to  Springfield  late  on 
a  Sunday  night ;  he  from  a  religious  meeting  which  he 
had  attended  in  another  city,  we  from  preaching  in  a 
congregation  that  was  vacant.  Upon  asking  him  whether 
he  knew  something  of  a  certain  congregation  in  the  town 
where  he  had  been  visiting,  he  replied  negatively  and 
said  that  he  was  not  interested  in  congregations  and 
denominations,  and  he  added :  ''Before  I  was  converted  I 
was  a  Methodist,  but  since  the  Lord  has  found  me  I 

II 


12  The  Augsburg  Coni-^ession. 

belong  to  no  church."  He  had  told  us  that  he  had  been 
attending  a  religious  meeting,  and  we  now  asked  him 
why  he  had  gone  to  a  distant  town  for  such  a  purpose. 
His  answer  was:  ''There  I  have  met  with  brethren  and 
sisters  in  Christ."  We  asked  whether  there  were  others 
in  other  cities  with  whom  they  harmonized  and  whom 
they  acknowledged  as  "brethren  and  sisters  in  Christ"? 
He  said  that  there  were  some  in  Chicago  and  some  in 
Kansas  City.  "What  is  the  name  of  your  organization, 
or  under  what  name  in  church  statistics  would  you  recog- 
nize those  brethren  and  sisters  in  that  town  and  in 
Chicago  and  Kansas  City?"  "We  have  no  organization 
and  no  name,  we  simply  call  ourselves  Christians."  Then 
he  proceeded  with  an  overflowing  heart  to  tell  of  why 
they  had  separated  themselves  from  the  world  and  from 
the  denominations,  with  their  discussion  of  creeds,  and 
which  were  the  truths  for  which  they  stood.  We  listened 
with  much  interest  to  the  things  which  he  enumerated 
as  the  principles  constituting  their  platform.  According 
to  his  speech  these  people  held  some  really  evangelical 
doctrines.  He  said  that  they  rejected  work-righteousness 
in  all  its  forms  and  were  basing  their  hope  of  salvation 
solely  upon  the  grace  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ.  This  part 
we  liked  especially  and  expressed  our  approval.  Finally 
he  took  from  his  pocket  a  tract,  and  handing  it  said : 
"Here  you  will  find  what  we  believe."  We  said  to  him : 
"And  this  is  your  creed  which  makes  you  a  church,  a 
denomination,  even  though  you  labor  to  avoid  a  denomi- 
national name.  The  distinction  between  you  and  the 
other  denominations  is  a  merely  theoretical  one.  You 
seem  to  have  a  creed  that  is  truly  evangelical  at  least  in 
the  great  fundamental  article  of  sin  and  grace." 

Yes,  we  cannot  think  of  a  church,  by  which  we  under- 
stand a  communion  of  believers  (see  Article  VH  of 
Augsburg  Confession)  without  a  creed,  without  confes- 
sions. A  congregation  and  a  denomination  which  has 
nothing  to  say,  nothing  to  confess  of  how  it  interprets 
the  Scriptures  on  the  doctrines  of  God  and  man  and  the 
scheme  of  redemption  and  the  way  of  salvation,  is  no 
church. 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  13 

II.  What  would  be  the  Dangers  of  a  Church  with- 
out a  Creed? 

After  having  just  tried  to  make  the  point  that  we  can- 
not think  of  a  church  without  some  kind  of  a  creed,  it 
might  seem  illogical  now  to  ask  the  question  what  the 
dangers  of  a  church  without  a  creed  would  be?  But 
while  it  is  true  that  a  church  necessarily  will  have  some- 
thing for  which  it  stands,  yet  there  are  to-day  so  many 
churches  with  an  attitude  of  great  indifference  to  a  creed, 
or  a  confessional  standard,  as  meaning  a  real  obligation 
for  teaching.  There  is  in  the  atmosphere  to-day  among 
the  churches  a  dislike  for  "confessionalism."  Individuals 
and  churches  must  be  "broad."  This  means  with  most 
people  that  there  must  be  no  positive  convictions  along 
doctrinal  lines.  The  things  in  which  churches  differ  are 
m^atters  of  indifference.  Never  should  we  quote  Scrip- 
ture in  support  of  our  denominational  positions.  If  the 
confessions  of  our  Church  should  teach  a  certain  doctrine 
on  the  basis  of  the  Scriptures,  and  another  denomination 
rejects  it  and  opposes  to  it  a  doctrine  which  is  the  reverse 
of  it,  then  both  should  be  considered  as  right,  or  perhaps 
better,  as  doubtful,  because  back  of  the  confessions 
stands  truth  as  an  unknown  quantity.  This  would  be 
about  a  fair  interpretation  of  what  people  now  mean  by 
**broad."  Churches  so  broad  are,  after  all,  practically 
churches  without  a  creed.  Now  let  us  ask  the  question : 
What  is  the  danger  of  a  church  without  a  creed? 

Such  a  church  is  a  playground  for  all  kinds  of  teachers. 
The  members  of  such  churches  do  not  know  where  they 
stand  and  what  preaching  they  can  expect  in  their  pul- 
pits. One  simply  cannot  tell  into  which  of  the  great 
variety  of  isms  and  errors  a  church  without  a  creed  may 
fall.  The  errors  in  the  direction  of  false  subjectivism  or 
unsound  enthusiasm  are  so  many.  Word  and  Sacraments 
as  means  of  grace  are  despised,  and  all  is  expected  of  an 
immediate  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  So  much  undue 
emphasis  is  laid  upon  man's  free  will  in  spiritual  matters 
and  upon  his  doings  as  a  condition  of  salvation  that  the 
doctrine  of  divine  grace  is  lost.  If  Lutherans  become 
indifferent  to  their  confessions  then  these  forms  of  error 


14  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

are  likely  to  come  in  from  all  sides.  A  danger  especially 
threatening  a  church  without  a  creed,  or,  let  us  say,  a 
church  that  has  no  appreciation  of  the  doctrinal  principles 
of  its  creed,  is  liberalism  or  rationalism^  a  teaching 
that  rejects  everything  that  cannot  be  perceived  by  man's 
reason.  No  amount  of  piety  that  may  permeate  a  con- 
gregation at  a  given  time  would  prove  a  sufficient  safe- 
guard for  the  future  against  rationalistic  influences. 
Here  church  history  has  given  us  an  object-lesson.  The 
pietistic  university  of  Halle  was  the  first  to  open  its 
doors  to  rationalism  when  that  movement  swept  Germany 
in  the  eighteenth  century.  The  father  of  rationalism, 
Semler,  professor  in  Halle,  who  spent  a  long  life  in  the 
work  of  undermining  the  Christian  faith,  was  at  the 
same  time  a  pietist,  and,  for  instance,  never  neglected 
family  worship.  There  is  a  point  where  pietism  and 
rationalism  can  meet  on  a  common  ground.  This  com- 
mon ground  is  indifference  to  the  confessions  of  the 
Church,  indifference  to  doctrine.  Men  with  real  interest 
in  the  creed  of  their  church  are  never  rationalists. 

III.  But  when  only  can  our  Confessions  offer  us  a 
Safeguard  against  Errors? 

We  must  get  acquainted  with  the  Confessions.  We 
should  study  their  principles.  This  is  especially  true  of 
the  ministry.  The  preachers  of  the  Word  need  these 
confessional  principles  as  an  aid  and  a  guide  for  rightly 
dividing  the  Word  of  truth.  But  our  laymen  also  need 
to  be  familiar  at  least  with  the  leading  principles  of  the 
faith  which  their  church  confesses.  Some  of  our  laymen 
are  expected  to  fill  positions  in  the  church  council  where 
they  not  infrequently  have  to  decide  matters  involving 
doctrinal  questions.  Many  of  our  laymen  have  to  serve 
as  teachers  and  speakers  in  Sunday  school  and  young 
people's  meetings.  For  such  work  they  need  to  be  guided 
by  doctrinal  principles  that  have  been  tried  out  by  the 
experience  of  the  Church.  Of  course,  laymen  cannot 
be  expected  to  master  Melanchthon's  Apology,  Luther's 
Smalcald  Articles,  the  Form  of  Concord.  But  they 
should  be  thoroughly  at  home  in  the  Small  Catechism. 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  15 

Laymen  who  want  to  be  intelligent  Lutherans  should 
never  cease  studying  Luther's  Catechism.  Let  me  here 
give  a  suggestion  how  that  can  be  done  in  a  most  success- 
ful way.  You  know  that  each  Synod  has  prepared  its 
own  Catechism.  And  many  gifted  teachers  of  the 
Church  have  also  published  an  interpretation  of  Luther's 
Catechism.  In  all  these  Catechisms  the  words  from 
Luther  are  the  same,  but  in  the  exposition  of  Luther's 
words  there  is  great  variety  in  form  and  thought.  Now 
the  laymen  of  our  Church,  aiming  at  an  education  in  the 
doctrinal  teaching  of  their  Church,  should  try  to  get, 
through  their  publication  house,  a  collection  of  all  these 
Catechisms.  A  comparative  study  of  them  of  which  the 
one  and  the  other  may  be  chosen  for  family  worship 
would  wonderfully  aid  our  laymen  in  building  up  and 
enriching  their  knowledge  of  the  principles  so  funda- 
mental to  a  successful  teaching  in  Sunday  school  and  the 
societies  of  the  Church.  But  here  let  us  take  a  step 
further  and  say :  Not  only  the  Catechism,  but  also  the 
Augsburg  Confession  should  be  studied  by  our  laymen. 
We  carry  the  Augsburg  Confession  in  our  Hymn  Books, 
thus  indicating  that  it  should  be  used  by  laymen  as  well 
as  ministers.  Our  laymen  should  be  familiar  with  the 
doctrinal  principles,  at  least  of  the  fir^st  twenty-one 
articles,  so  that  they  can  make  use  of  them  in  teaching 
and  apply  them  as  cases  may  arise  in  the  practical  life 
of  the  congregation.  A  laity  so  grounded  in  Scripture 
truth  would  be  a  real  bulwark  against  the  errors  threaten- 
ing the  life  of  the  Church.  Here  we  have  spoken  as  if 
to  be  grounded  in  the  Confessions  is  equal  to  being 
grounded  in  the  Scriptures.  This  suggests  another 
question : 

IV.  What  is  the  Relation  of  the  Confessions  to  the 
Scriptures  ? 

We  would,  of  course,  not  be  justified  in  making  con- 
fessions equal  to  the  Scriptures.  The  Scriptures  are  the 
absolute  source  of  truth,  the  absolute  rule  of  faith. 
The  Confessions  are  mere  witnesses  of  what  the  Church 
or  what  the   individual  as   a  member   of   the   Church, 


i6  The:  Augsburg  Concession. 

believes  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  Scriptures  in  things 
fundamental.  Our  Confessions  aim  at  reducing  the  lead- 
ing truths  of  Scripture  to  practical  principles.  Whether 
a  certain  Confession,  say,  for  instance,  the  Augsburg 
Confession,  has  succeeded  in  expressing  what  the  Scrip- 
tures actually  teach,  is  for  us  to  examine  and  to  say. 
If,  after  such  examination  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
we  should  feel  satisfied  that  it  is  in  harmony  with  Scrip- 
ture truth,  then  we  are  Lutherans  of  conviction.  If  in 
time  we  should  arrive  at  a  different  conviction  and 
believe  that  the  principles  of  this  Confession  are  in 
conflict  with  the  Scriptures — a  conviction  to  which  we 
would  have  a  perfect  right — then  we  would,  of  course, 
cease  to  be  Lutherans.  May  be  that  in  such  case  our 
doubt  would  pertain  to  just  one  point,  and  only  in  this 
one  point  we  would  feel  that  we  are  in  harmony  with 
some  other  church.  Then  we  would  be  un-Lutheran  in 
this  one  point.  But  in  such  case  there  is  usually  some 
self-deception.  Lutheranism,  like  Calvinism  and  Cathol- 
icism, is  a  system.  One  point  of  doctrine  is  an  insepara- 
ble part  of  the  whole  doctrinal  structure.  It  takes  some 
study  to  see  that.  So  it  may  be  that  a  man  who  finds 
himself  in  conflict  with  the  Lutheran  Church  in  one 
doctrine  is  out  of  joint  with  Lutheranism  altogether. 
It  may  also  be  that  he  simply  misunderstands.  If  he 
would  be  led  to  see  what  the  Scriptures  here  teach  and 
what  the  meaning  of  the  Confession  in  this  point  is, 
then  there  might  be  no  difliculty. 

We  have  said  that  as  Lutherans  we  should  examine 
the  Augsburg  Confession  and  reach  a  conclusion  as  to 
its  agreement  with  the  Scriptures.  It  is  our  good  right, 
as  sons  and  daughters  of  the  Reformation,  to  do  this. 
We  should  not  say  that  we  are  Lutherans  simply  because 
our  fathers  were  Lutherans.  Our  real  reason  should  be 
this,  that  we  believe  the  Confessions  of  the  Lutheran 
Church  to  be  Scriptural.  Laymen  as  well  as  ministers 
can  form  a  judgment  on  this  question.  There  is  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith  as  contained  in  Article  IV 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  He  who  is  at  home  in  the 
Epistles   of    St.    Paul,   especially   in   his   letters   to   the 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  17 

Galatians  and  the  Romans,  can  soon  form  an  opinion 
as  to  whether  the  doctrine  of  this  article  is  Scriptural 
or  not.  There  is  in  Article  VI  of  the  Confession  the 
doctrine  of  the  New  Obedience,  or  of  sanctification.  A 
layman  can  find,  from  studying  Paul  and  others  of  the 
sacred  writers,  whether  this  peculiarly  Lutheran  setting, 
namely,  justification  on  account  of  the  merits  of  Christ, 
through  faith,  as  the  source,  and  good  works  or  sanctifi- 
cation as  the  stream  from  the  source,  is  Scriptural  or 
not.  So  you  can  take  one  article  after  the  other,  and,  in 
many  cases,  aided  by  your  Catechism,  you  can  carry  out 
an  examination  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  which  will 
lead  you  to  very  definite  results.  We  predict  that  when 
you  in  your  investigation  keep  close  to  the  Scrip- 
tures and  in  your  interpretation  are  willing  to  be 
guided  by  the  Gospel  in  the  Scriptures  (the  analogy 
of  faith),  then  you  w^U  find  yourselves  in  complete 
harmony  with  the  Augsburg  Confession.  And  the 
longer  you  study  the  more  you  will  become  convinced 
that  even  the  doctrines  more  remote  from  the  centre  are 
doctrines  of  the  Scriptures  and  that  in  our  great  Augs- 
burg Confession  they  have  been  formulated  in  entire 
agreement  with  the  central  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith.     But  now  let  us  take  up  another  question. 

V.  Is  our  Lutheran  Church  right  in  making  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  v/hich  was  written  in  the  Six- 
teenth Century,  the  Guide  for  Men  who  live  in  the 
Twentieth  Century? 

Opponents  to  creeds  when  they  make  this  point  seem 
to  be  sure  of  almost  general  applause.  But  do  not  be 
deceived.  Stop  and  think  a  little  before  you  join.  Each 
one  of  our  creeds  marks  a  certain  experience  which  the 
Church  of  Christ  has  had  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  We  shall  discuss  this  thought  more  connectedly 
in  the  following  paragraph  (under  question  VI).  Here 
we  have  reference  only  to  the  Augsburg  Confession. 
We  are  Lutherans.  Let  us  consider  for  a  moment  the 
conditions  that  called  into  existence  the  Lutheran  Church 
and  its  great  Confession.    We  cannot  help  but  see  God's 


i8  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

hand  in  the  shaping  of  the  circumstances.  Centuries  of 
the  most  providential  preparation  had  been  going  before. 
There  was  a  longing  for  the  Gospel.  The  voices  of 
Savonarola,  Wickliffe  and  Huss  had  been  heard  as 
prophets.  Then,  at  the  darkest  hour,  one  may  say, 
Luther  came,  a  man  such  as  the  age  needed.  He  had 
experienced  the  Reformation  in  his  own  heart.  The  old 
Pauline  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  was  discovered. 
He  was  a  religious  genius  in  preaching  and  writing,  and 
endowed  with  creative  powers  in  every  direction.  While 
Melanchthon  wrote  the  Augsburg  Confession,  it  is  the 
theology,  the  religion  of  Luther,  a  religion  born  out  of 
the  struggles  of  his  conscience  for  the  forgiveness  of 
sins !  Now,  dear  reader,  appealing  to  what  you  and 
everyone  would  understand  of  history,  can  you  imagine 
that  such  a  religious  discovery,  divinely  prepared  for 
centuries,  should  have  nothing  but  a  passing  significance  ? 
Think  of  the  time  when  the  Augsburg  Confession  was 
written,  1530.  It  was  prepared  as  the  common  Confes- 
sion of  almost  all  the  Protestants  of  Germany.  It  was 
an  age  that  was  literally  pregnant  with  the  great  evan- 
gelical idea.  Creed  making  was  the  most  natural  thing. 
Our  age,  with  its  superior  learning,  can  create  nothing 
like  the  Augsburg  Confession  or  Luther's  Small  Cate- 
chism. The  leading  thoughts  of  our  age  are  of  such  a 
conflicting  nature  as  to  their  relation  to  each  other  that 
there  is  absolutely  no  unifying  idea  in  sight.  Luther 
was  the  mouthpiece  of  a  great  controlling  idea ;  it  was 
his  answer  to  the  question :  What  shall  I  do  to  be  saved  ? 
It  was  a  creed-producing  age.  Luther  wrote  to  relieve 
the  ignorance  of  the  ministers  in  teaching  their  cate- 
chumens, and  the  result  was  his  Large  Catechism.  Then 
he  wrote  to  place  in  their  hands  a  book  that  might  be 
used  as  a  guide  for  catechetical  instruction,  and  the 
result  was  his  Small  Catechism.  Wherever  Luther  and 
Melanchthon  met  among  themselves  or  with  others, 
articles  of  faith  were  formulated,  and  these  articles  were 
of  such  a  nature  that  they  are  published  even  in  our  day. 
There  are  the  Torgau  Articles,  the  Marburg  Articles, 
the   Schwabach  Articles.     The  creative  powers  of  the 


TiiJt  Augsburg  Confession.  19 

Church  of  Christ  were  raised  to  the  highest  potentiahty. 
That  was  the  case  especially  during  those  memorable 
days  in  May  and  June,  in  Augsburg  (1530),  when  the 
new  Church  was  called  upon  to  state  before  the  Emperor 
and  all  the  Estates  of  Germany  and  the  representatives 
of  the  Pope  what  it  believed.  Again  the  question :  Can 
you  believe  that  this  Augsburg  Confession,  which  came 
into  existence  under  such  circumstances,  the  Confession 
with  which  the  Lutheran  Church  as  a  Church  was  born, 
should  now  be  obsolete  and  give  place  to  something  new  ? 
No,  and  again  no!  You  cannot  reject  the  doctrinal  prin- 
ciples of  this  Confession  without  giving  up  the  Lutheran 
Church  itself. 

When  we  thus  speak,  then  we  have  something  of  an 
experience  back  of  us.  The  Augsburg  Confession  has 
been  tested  for  a  period  of  almost  four  hundred  years. 
All  kinds  of  modifications  have  been  suggested,  some  in 
one  article,  some  in  another.  But  we  have  not  yet  found 
the  courage  to  make  any  changes.  Some  suggestions 
came  from  the  camp  of  the  Reformed  churches.  But 
to-day  we  are  more  sure  than  ever  that  any  concession 
in  this  direction  would  have  been  a  mistake.  Most  of 
the  suggestions  to  modify  the  principles  of  the  Augus- 
tana,  of  which  we  hear  to-day,  come  from  the  Socinian 
camp,  from  the  men  of  modern  theology.  They  think 
that  the  conception  of  the  Trinity  as  contained  in  Article 
I  of  our  Confession,  which  is  the  same  as  that  of  the 
Nicene  Creed,  needs  modification.  In  Article  II  they  do 
not  like  the  doctrine  of  man's  total  depravity,  nor  the 
doctrine  of  Article  XVIII  that  man  cannot  be  saved  by 
powers  of  his  own.  With  reference  to  Article  III  (the 
Son  of  God)  we  are  admonished  at  least  to  strike  out  the 
thought  that  Christ  should  "reconcile  the  Father  unto 
us,"  and  be  a  sacrifice ;  and  in  the  same  way  in  Article 
IV  (Justification)  to  do  away  with  the  idea  of  Christ's 
death  being  a  "satisfaction  for  our  sins,"  as  also  with 
the  idea  of  an  imputed  righteousness.  If  we  consider 
the  source  of  the  present-day  objections  against  the 
Augsburg  Confession  as  a  creed  for  men  of  the  twenti- 


20  Thi:  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

eth  century,  then  there  will  be  no  inclination  for  us  to 
make  concessions — not  as  long  as  we  are  Lutherans. 

With  this  we  do  not  want  to  say  that  the  Augsburg 
Confession  is  a  complete  presentation  of  Christian  doc- 
trines for  all  times.  We  do  not  even  want  to  say  that 
this  Confession  is  in  all  instances  the  best  possible  formu- 
lation of  the  doctrines  presented.  What  we  insist 
upon  is  that  its  doctrines  are  Scriptural,  and  for  this 
reason  cannot  be  overthrown.  We  may,  by  elucidation 
and  by  the  use  of  comprehensive  definitions,  succeed  in 
making  the  truth  clearer  and  more  fitting  to  meet  the 
peculiar  errors  of  our  age.  We  may  also  be  able  to  add 
something  of  importance,  something  that  the  Church  of 
Christ  has  learned  since  the  formulation  of  the  Confes- 
sion. Much  valuable  truth  of  this  kind  is  found  in  the 
Formula  of  Concord.  And  many  resolutions  adopted  by 
Synods  and  conventions  in  crises  of  the  Church's  history 
are  also  of  value.  The  time  may  come  when  in  view  of 
the  assaults  of  modern  theology  upon  the  Bible  the 
Church  will  be  called  upon,  and  will  be  ready  to 
formulate  a  new  Confession  covering  the  points  that  are 
especially  in  controversy  between  the  adherents  of  the 
old  and  the  new  faith.  But  such  twentieth  or  twenty- 
fifth  century  creed  would  not  reject  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession, but  it  would  build  upon  its  foundations.  When 
our  fathers  in  Augsburg  formulated  their  Confession 
they  did  not  first  tear  down  the  Apostles'  Creed  and  the 
Nicene  Creed,  but  they  built  upon  these  foundations. 
(Read  what  Articles  III  and  I  of  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion have  to  say  on  that  subject.)  Our  Confession  was 
not  a  "modification"  of  the  ancient  creeds,  but  rather  a 
development  and  an  amplification  of  them.  There  is 
reason  to  fear  that  the  men  who  are  always  laboring  to 
hold  the  way  open  for  a  reconstruction,  or  a  modification 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  will  soon 
feel  that  the  Nicene  Creed  has  to  go  also.  The  aim  is 
in  the  last  analysis  at  the  divinity  of  Christ.  It  goes 
against  the  doctrine  that  Jesus  is  ''of  the  same  essence 
and  power,"  "co-eternal"  with  the  Father  (Article  I). 
All  this  talk  that  the  Augsburg  Confession  does  not  fit 


The  Augsburg  Con]'e:ssion,  21 

any  longer  for  the  man  of  the  twentieth  century,  is 
Socinian  or  rationahstic  in  tendency.  Here  we  can 
make  no  concessions.  If  we  have  to  strike  out  of  our 
creed  the  full  divinity  of  Christ  and  the  substitutional 
character  of  His  atoning  death  upon  Calvary;  if  we 
cannot  believe  any  more  that  man  in  his  natural  condi- 
tion has  suffered  a  depravity  as  described  in  Article  H 
of  the  Confession,  then  all  our  preaching  will  be  a  con- 
stant detraction  from  the  merits  of  Christ.  The  ground 
from  beneath  the  article  of  justification  by  faith  is 
gone.  Then  we  may  quit  preaching,  because  we  would 
have  no  message  any  more  to  a  world  lost  in  sin. 

VI.  How  do  the  Confessions  appear  when  we  con- 
sider the  Causes  which  brought  them  into  Existence 
and  the  Conditions  which  led  to  their  Adoption? 

Many  people  look  upon  creeds  as  the  product  of  minds 
that  had  a  fondness  for  speculation.  They  forget  the 
historical  necessity  back  of  the  creeds.  The  fact  is  that 
each  one  of  them  marks  an  important  epoch  in  the 
Church's  experience  of  religious  truth. 

When  our  Lord  w^as  about  to  leave  His  disciples  they 
were  in  sorrow,  because  they  did  not  know  who  should 
teach  and  lead  them.  But  He  gave  them  the  promise 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  who  should  guide  them  into  all  truth. 
(John  16:13.)  Each  one  of  our  Confessions  marks  a 
fulfilment  of  this  promise. 

There  is  the  Apostles'  Creed.  This  Creed,  in  the  form 
we  have  it  in  our  Catechism  and  use  it  in  our  churches, 
was  not  written  by  the  Apostles  before  leaving  Jerusalem, 
each  of  them  contributing  a  sentence,  as  a  legend  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  church  has  it.  No,  this  creed  repre- 
sents a  gradual  growth.  It  grew  out  of  the  need  of  the 
Church  to  have  a  confessional  formula  around  which 
the  instruction  of  the  catechumens  might  cluster.  At 
the  same  time  it  was  needed  as  a  bulwark  against  the 
influences  of  heretical  teachers,  (Ebionites,  Gnostics). 
It  must  have  been  very  brief  at  first.  Our  New  Testa- 
ment scholars  hold  that  we  have  references  to  it  in  the 
following  passages  in  the  epistles  of   Paul  and  John: 


22  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

Gal.  1:9;  Romans  10:9  and  10;  i  Cor.  15:1;  i  Tim. 
3:  16;  I  John  4:2  and  3.  This  creed  represented  the 
''Gospel"  in  a  nutshell.  In  the  course  of  time  one  sen- 
tence after  the  other  was  added.  It  became  the  ''Bap- 
tismal Formula"  by  which  Christians  would  know  each 
other.  The  more  elaborate  form  in  which  we  now  have 
it  in  our  churches  dates  from  the  seventh  century. 

A  confession  which  is  a  little  more  theological  in  char- 
acter is  the  Nicene  Creed.  A  study  of  the  history  of  this 
creed  especially  can  show  us  that  our  confessions  have 
come  into  existence  not  as  the  result  of  fruitless  specula- 
tion, but  in  response  to  a  deep  need  in  the  Church.  The 
time  had  come  in  the  history  of  the  Church  when  the 
divinity  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  was  seriously  at  stake. 
Arius,  a  man  with  a  great  following,  taught  that  Christ 
was  not  co-eternal  with  the  Father,  but  that  He  had  been 
created  in  time.  While  Arius  regarded  Christ  as  superior 
to  all  of  us,  yet  He  was  after  all  only  a  creature  of  God. 
Can  a  created  being,  even  if  He  is  superior  to  His  fellow- 
creatures,  save  us  from  guilt  and  the  curse  of  sin?  Here 
the  controversy  began.  Athanasius,  whom  church  history 
has  honored  with  the  name  "father  of  orthodoxy," 
fought  for  the  phrases  which  at  the  first  great  synod  at 
Nicea  (325)  were  incorporated  in  the  creed:  "Begotten 
of  His  Father,  before  all  Worlds,  God  of  God,  Light  of 
Light,  Very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made,  being 
of  one  Substance  with  the  Father."  A  great  struggle 
between  Nicene  Christianity  and  Arianism,  lasting 
through  six  decades,  followed.  It  tried  the  life  of  the 
Church,  until  finally,  under  the  Emperor  Theodosius,  the 
Great,  at  the  second  ecumenical  council,  held  in  Con- 
stantinople in  381,  the  Nicene  creed  gained  the  victory. 
This  was  in  the  Roman  empire.  But  meanwhile  Arian- 
ism had  spread  among  the  new  Germanic  peoples :  the 
Goths,  the  Vandals,  the  Burgunds,  the  Sueves,  the  Longo- 
bards.  For  a  long  time  it  seemed  as  if  these  with  their 
great  future  before  them  would  after  all  decide  the 
overthrow  of  Nicene  Christianity.  But  God  in  His 
providence  interfered.  The  conversion  of  the  Franks 
(after  496)    and  their   adoption   of  the   Nicene   Creed 


Thi;  Augsburg  Coni^ivSSion.  23 

turned  the  tide,  and  soon  these  peoples  also  have  the 
Athanasian  or  Nicene  form  of  Christianity.  Our  pur- 
pose is  to  show  that  there  was  something  at  stake  in 
connection  with  the  adoption  of  the  Nicene  Creed.  It 
was  about  the  divinity  of  Christ.  What  would  Chris- 
tianity have  been  to-day,  if  Arianism  had  succeeded  in 
maintaining  itself? 

Up  to  this  time  the  chief  interest  of  the  Church  had 
been  centered  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  the 
person  of  Christ.  Our  Lutheran  Confessions  have  ac- 
cepted the  decisions  of  the  old  Catholic  Church  in  these 
questions,  as  can  be  seen  from  Articles  I  and  III  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession.  Of  these  two  great  fundamental 
doctrines,  ''the  chief  articles  concerning  the  Divine 
Majesty,"  as  Luther  wrote  in  the  First  Part  of  the  Smal- 
cald  Articles,  ''there  is  no  contention  or  dispute,  since  we 
on  both  sides  confess  them."  But  now  another  question 
came  into  the  foreground ;  it  was  the  great  practical 
question:  What  shall  I  do  to  be  saved?  The  problems 
discussed  were  these :  What  influence  has  the  fall  of 
Adam  had  upon  man's  spiritual  nature?  Does  sin  consist 
merely  in  the  sinful  acts,  or  does  it  also  include  his 
natural  inclination  to  sinning?  What  spiritual  powers 
are  left  in  man?  Can  he  himself  effect  his  regeneration 
and  conversion  in  any  degree,  or  does  he  here  wholly 
depend  upon  the  Holy  Spirit?  How  are  "good  works" 
to  be  valued,  as  meritorious  and  preparing  the  way  for 
justification,  or  what  is  the  relation  between  justification 
and  sanctification  ?  The  answer  to  these  and  related 
questions,  that  was  given  during  the  mediaeval  age,  it  is 
what  we  to-day  understand  by  Romanism.  There  was 
an  exceedingly  superficial  conception  of  sin.  Only  the 
outbreaks  of  sinful  nature  were  regarded  as  real  sins. 
The  condition  of  man's  heart,  the  evil  desire,  was  re- 
garded as  something  indifferent.  Man's  spiritual  powers, 
while  they  may  have  been  weakened  in  consequence  of 
the  fall,  are  not  affected  to  such  an  extent  that  he,  with 
the  powers  of  his  own  free  will  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
merely  assisting  him,  could  not  bring  about  the  change 
of  his  heart.  Good  works  were  regarded  as  meritoriously 


24  Thi:  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

preparing  the  way  for  justification,  a  process  that  was 
ever  to  go  on,  and  to  be  aided  by  the  Sacraments  as  a 
means  of  power  in  the  hands  of  an  hierarchically  or- 
ganized Church.  This  Romanism  as  we  have  here  char- 
acterized it  was  the  source  of  all  the  evils  and  abuses 
under  which  the  Church  was  suffering  when  the  age  of 
the  Reformation  was  approaching.  Against  this  system 
of  work-righteousness  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  grace 
had  to  be  opposed.  This  was  done  through  Luther  and 
others  who  followed  him.  The  best  exposition  of  this 
new  evangelical  faith  we  have  in  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion. God  had  led  His  Church  to  a  new  religious 
experience  by  which  there  should  be  given  to  multitudes 
the  vision  of  a  way  to  a  real  assurance  of  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins. 

What  now  is  the  result  of  our  investigation  again  at 
the  close  of  this  paragraph  ?  This :  No  one  familiar 
with  the  history  of  our  Confessions  will  want  to  look  at 
these  documents  as  something  artificially  gotten  up,  as 
the  products  of  minds  fond  of  speculation;  but  he  will 
see  in  them  the  hand  of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  who 
steered  the  ship  of  the  Church  through  all  errors,  so 
that  the  Church  could  arrive,  step  by  step,  at  a  clear 
understanding  of  what  the  Scriptures  intended  to  teach 
as  eternal  truth. 

VII.  Does  the  Appreciation  and  the  Study  of 
Creeds  Interfere  with  a  truly  Religious  Life  of  In- 
dividuals and  Churches? 

This  is  a  question  which  has  been  answered  in  the 
affirmative  by  many  who  meant  well  in  promoting  the 
cause  of  spirituality  in  the  Church  of  Christ. 

Of  course,  we  have  observed  that  there  is  such  a  thing 
as  knowing  of  Christ  and  not  having  Him  in  the  heart. 
We  have  met  men  who  knew  the  doctrines  of  their  Church 
and  were  zealous  in  defending  them,  but  there  seemed 
to  be  about  them  no  symptoms  of  real  religious  life.  And 
we  know  of  periods  in  the  Church's  history  when  there 
was  an  over-emphasis  upon  the  intellectual  in  religion 


The;  Augsburg  Coni?e;ssion.  25 

coupled  with  a  lack  of  true  godliness  in  the  life  of  the 
professors  of  religion. 

We  do  not  want  to  close  our  eyes  to  dangers  of  any 
kind.  As  there  have  always  been  men  and  women  in 
the  Church  who  permitted  themselves  to  live  too  much  in 
the  sphere  of  the  emotional,  so  there  have  also  been 
those  who  made  the  other  mistake  of  being  satisfied  with 
what  appealed  to  the  intellect,  delighting  in  doctrinal 
definitions  and  overlooking  the  claims  of  religion  upon 
the  heart. 

But  would  we  be  justified  on  account  of  this  now  to 
depreciate  the  creeds?  That  would  be  very  foolish.  It 
will  always  remain  an  indisputable  fact,  as  we  have  seen, 
that  the  confessions  have  grown,  with  an  inner  neces- 
sity, out  of  the  life  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  If  they 
are  not  used  right,  then  the  fault  lies  with  the  individual 
who  permits  himself  to  become  interested  in  the  Confes- 
sions and  to  become  defenders  of  them  before  there  has 
been  a  religious  experience  in  the  heart.  The  creed 
should  be  an  expression  of  the  religious  life  of  the 
Christian.  As  we  read  in  Paul  to  the  Romans  (10:  10)  : 
'With  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteousness,  and 
with  the  mouth  confession  is  made  unto  salvation."  And 
in  I  Peter  3:  15,  "Be  ready  always  to  give  answer  to 
every  man  that  asketh  you  a  reason  concerning  the  hope 
that  is  in  you." 

When  we  use  the  Apostles'  Creed  in  our  worship  on 
Sundays,  and  the  Nicene  Creed  at  the  great  festivals 
of  the  Church  Year,  then  we  feel  that  the  Confession  of 
our  creed  has  a  rightful  place  in  our  religious  life.  And 
not  only  the  great  and  the  simple  creeds  of  the  ancient 
Church,  but  also  the  special  Confessions  of  our  Lutheran 
Church  should  be  used  by  us  as  expressions  of  our  faith. 
Because,  as  we  have  seen,  they  cover  a  special  experi- 
ence of  the  Church,  a  more  advanced  experience  as 
compared  with  the  ancient  creeds.  Our  Small  Catechism 
especially  is  full  of  that  deeply  spiritual  element  which 
fits  it  as  an  expression  of  the  inner  religious  life.  Let 
me  illustrate  this :  A  girl  of  about  ten  years  of  age  was 
to  undergo  a  serious  operation,  and  the  surgeon  before 


26  Thij  Augsburg  Confession. 

beginning  his  work  asked  whether  she  had  something  to 
say.  She  folded  her  hands  and  repeating  Luther's  ex- 
planation of  the  second  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
which  she  had  learned  by  heart,  said:  ''I  believe  that 
Jesus  Christ,  true  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  from 
eternity,  and  also  true  man,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
is  my  Lord;  who  has  redeemed  me,  a  lost  and  con- 
demned creature,  secured  and  delivered  me  from  all 
sins,  from  death,  and  from  the  power  of  the  devil,  not 
with  silver  and  gold,  but  with  His  holy  and  precious 
blood,  and  with  His  innocent  sufferings  and  death ;  in 
order  that  I  might  be  His,  live  under  Him  in  His  king- 
dom, and  serve  Him  in  everlasting  righteousness,  inno- 
cence and  blessedness :  even  as  He  is  risen  from  the 
dead,  and  Hves  and  reigns  in  all  eternity.  This  is  most 
certainly  true."  And  after  she  had  finished  she  said: 
''This  I  believe."  Yes,  dear  friends,  after  such  a  quota- 
tion we  feel  that  it  will  not  do  for  us  always  almost 
instinctively  to  associate  the  creeds  with  men  of  dead 
orthodoxy  or  a  petrified  Christianity.  By  doing  this  we 
deceive  ourselves  and  neglect  the  use  of  a  rich  fountain 
of  blessing.  Pastor  Loehe,  one  of  the  fathers  of  Inner 
Missions  in  Germany,  said  that  at  night  he  could  lie  for 
hours  on  his  bed,  and,  with  the  joy  of  salvation  in  his 
heart,  repeat  one  part  of  Luther's  Catechism  after  the 
other. 

The  Augsburg  Confession  is  necessarily  more  theo- 
logical than  Luther's  Catechism.  And  yet  these  simple 
statements  of  Scripture  truths,  as  our  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion has  them,  are  well  adapted  as  confession  of  what 
''man  believeth  unto  righteousness."  Take,  for  instance, 
the  following  words  of  Article  V :  "That  we  may  obtain 
this  faith,  the  office  of  teaching  the  Gospel  and  adminis- 
tering the  Sacraments  was  instituted.  For  through  the 
Word  and  Sacraments  as  through  instruments,  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  given,  who  worketh  faith  where  and  when  it 
pleaseth  God  in  them  that  hear  the  Gospel,  to  wit,  that 
God,  not  for  our  own  merits,  but  for  Christ's  sake,  justi- 
fied those  who  believe  that  they  are  received  into  favor 
for  Christ's  sake."    The  fact  is  that  our  creeds  deal  with 


The  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  27 

the  fundamentals  of  our  religion.  It  is  the  principles  of 
our  Confessions  that  give  frame  and  system  to  what  we 
believe  of  Scripture  truth.  Without  these  principles  our 
religion  is  nothing  but  vacillating  sentiment,  nothing  but 
a  conglomeration  of  thoughts  without  leading  ideas. 

Let  us  again  ask  the  question  with  which  we  started: 
Is  the  appreciation  and  the  study  of  creeds  irreconcilable 
with  true  spirituality?  Study  the  life  of  the  Church 
fathers.  What  a  devotion  to  the  Master  there  was  in  men 
like  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Athanasius,  Basilius, 
Augustine !  A  very  great  part  of  the  energies  of  these 
men  was  taken  up  with  struggles  against  the  doctrinal 
errors  of  their  age.  They  watched  with  zealousness  over 
the  faith  delivered  unto  the  saints.  And  yet  about  the 
devotional  expressions  and  productions  of  these  men 
there  is  a  wonderful  charm.  Read  the  "Confessions" 
of  Augustine,  and  you  will  see  how  spiritually-minded  a 
man  can  be  who  with  all  the  mighty  powers  of  his  think- 
ing labored  to  develop  the  doctrines  of  the  Church.  And 
of  the  Reformation  age  take  men  like  Luther  and 
Melanchthon  who  gave  to  us  the  Confessions  which  dis- 
tinguish the  Church  to  which  we  belong.  Personal  piety 
and  interest  in  doctrines  are  with  Luther  and  Melanch- 
thon and  Lazarus  Spengeler,  and  so  many  others,  not 
two  separate  strains,  running  parallel  and  never  touch- 
ing, but  they  are  together  in  a  union  like  body  and  soul. 
Piety  with  these  men  can  have  no  existence  without  pure 
doctrine.  So  it  ought  to  be.  So  it  was  even  yet  in  men 
like  Martin  Chemnitz,  Johann  Gerhard,  in  Starck  and 
Arndt,  in  Paul  Gerhardt  and  in  the  great  Lutheran 
hymn  writers  of  the  first  period.  The  separation  of  these 
two  factors  in  modern  Christians  is  a  deplorable 
symptom. 

VIII.  How  will  the  knowledge  of  and  the  adher- 
ence to  the  Principles  of  a  Creed  aid  a  Preacher  and  a 
Teacher  of  the  Christian  Religion? 

In  the  first  place,  it  will  help  htm  to  be  clear  in  his 
presentations.  And  what  he  says  will  be  retainable. 
Here  is  a  shortcoming  on  the  part  of  many  preachers  and 


28  The  Augsburg  Con?e:ssion. 

teachers  who  have  little  or  no  interest  in  the  principles 
of  their  creed.  A  preaching  and  a  teaching  that  does 
not  rest  upon  doctrinal  principles  is,  as  a  rule,  lacking 
in  clearness,  and,  for  this  reason,  tires  the  hearers.  No 
wonder,  because  there  is  no  frame  to  the  thoughts,  no 
system  in  the  presentation.  In  the  Confessions  of  our 
Church  we  have,  in  clear  outlines,  the  plan  of  salvation, 
the  need  of  salvation,  its  conditions,  its  consequences  for 
the  individual  and  for  the  congregation  of  believers. 
One  requirement  of  a  good  teacher  is  that  his  viewpoints 
are  well  taken.  Our  Confessions  will  furnish  a  preacher 
and  a  teacher  with  viewpoints  that  are  in  harmony  with 
the  leading  thoughts  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  This  will 
materially  aid  him  to  be  clear  and  lucid  in  his  presen- 
tations. 

Secondly,  it  will  make  him  a  reliable  teacher.     His 
teaching  comes  not  in  the  form  of  subjective  notions,  but 
in  the  form  of  doctrines  tested  by  the  experience  of  the 
Church  of  Christ.    His  teaching,  then,  will  be  in  harmony 
with  the  Word  of  God.     So  it  should  be.     In  i  Peter 
4:11,  we  read:   ''If  any  man  speak,  let  him  speak  as  the 
oracles  of  God."     In  teaching  in  the  Church  no  one  of 
us,  be  he  pastor  or  layman,  has  the  right  to  teach  human 
wisdom,  but  he  must  teach  the  Word  of  God,  the  ''oracles 
of  God."    Have  you  ever  thought  of  this,  that  in  teaching 
in  the  Church  you  are  not  only  to  teach  on  the  basis  of 
God's  Word,  but  in  such  a  way  that  your  own  teaching, 
your  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  is  like  "the  oracles 
of  God"?     That  is  what  this  passage,  quoted  from  St. 
Peter,    means.      Yes,    preaching    and    teaching    in    the 
Church  of  Christ  is  a  most  serious  thing.    James  (3:1) 
therefore,  admonishes:    "Be  not  many  of  you  teachers, 
my  brethren,  knowing  that  we  shall  receive  heavier  judg- 
ment."    But,  my   friends,   instead   of   advising  you   to 
abstain  from  teaching,  let  me  show  you  how  you  can 
become  reliable  teachers  of  the  divine  Word.     Study  the 
Confessions  of  your  Church,  especially  Luther's  Small 
Catechism  and  the  Augsburg  Confession.     As  we  have 
already  said,  here  you  are  furnished  with  the  true  view- 
points;  here  you  find  the  keys  for  understanding  the 


The:  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  29 

Scriptures;  here  you  have,  as  we  would  say  in  a  theo- 
logical term,  the  analogy  of  faith,  or,  as  Paul,  in  the 
translation  of  King  James'  version,  says,  in  his  letter  to 
the  Romans  (12:6),  the  ''proportion  of  faith."  For 
teaching  God's  Word  we  need  in  our  minds,  to  begin 
with,  a  setting  of  divine  truths,  where  the  fundamentals 
of  our  Christian  religion  are  placed  in  the  right  relations 
to  each  other.  This  we  have  in  our  Confessions.  If  we 
follow  them  as  a  guide,  the  Bible  will  be  to  us  something 
altogether  different  from  what  it  would  be,  if  we  start 
out  independently,  ignorant  of  what  our  Church  has 
summed  up  as  fundamental  truths.  Now  we  will  find  the 
scheme  of  redemption  running  through  the  whole  Bible. 
Without  such  a  guide  the  Bible,  in  its  largest  part,  will 
appear  to  us  as  a  mass  of  disconnected  moral  require- 
ments. We  must  so  study  the  Bible  that  we  can  find 
the  Saviour  even  in  the  Old  Testament. 

Thirdly,  if  you  do  your  teaching  of  the  divine  Word 
under  the  guide  of  the  Confessions  then  you  can  have  a 
good  conscience.  You  are  in  harmony  with  the  doctrinal 
experiences  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  You  do  not  ignore 
what  the  Church  has  learned  in  the  school  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  He  who  ignores  the  Confessions  as  a  guide  in 
teaching  in  the  Church  may  some  day  find  that  he  has 
been  teaching  notions  instead  of  eternal  truth.  At  the 
foundation  of  his  teaching  there  is  not  the  Biblical  way 
of  salvation  as  it  stands  out  so  clearly  in  the  Confessions 
of  our  Church.  ''To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony !  if 
they  speak  not  according  to  this  Word,  surely  there  is 
no  morning  for  them."  (Isaiah  8:20.)  As  an  illus- 
tration of  this  the  people  of  the  Fatherland  have  recently 
had  a  remarkable  experience.  You  may  have  heard  of 
the  fellowship  movement  (Gemeinschaftsbewegung)  in 
Germany.  It  aim_s  at  gathering  into  societies  the  spirit- 
ually alive  Christians  all  over  the  land  for  the  purposes 
of  Christian  fellowship  among  each  other  and  evangeliza- 
tion of  the  world.  This  movement  began  about  thirty- 
five  years  ago  and  has  had  a  marvelous  development.  At 
their  annual  conventions  at  Gnadau,  Blankenburg  and 
Eisenach  these  people  assemble  by  the  thousands.    With 


30  The:  Augsburg  Con:^ession. 

their  many  houses  of  worship,  with  their  host  of  evan- 
gelists and  workers,  with  their  press  they  have  exercised 
a  remarkable  influence.  But  from  the  beginning  the 
movement  was  out  of  harmony  with  so  many  essentials 
of  Lutheran  doctrine.  It  was  greatly  influenced  by  the 
Oxford  movement  in  England,  especially  by  Pearsall 
Smith,  of  Philadelphia,  who  visited  Germany  in  1875 
preaching  his  new  gospel  to  many  thousands  in  the  lead- 
ing cities  of  the  Fatherland.  The  emphasis  was  upon 
perfect  holiness  which,  he  said,  every  one  simply  giving 
himself  to  Jesus  can  attain  now.  The  motto  was :  ''J^sus 
saves  me  now."  As  doctrinal  ground  the  thought  was 
emphasized  that  in  the  death  of  Christ  our  sin  has  been 
annihilated.  This  is  our  salvation  through  the  Christ 
in  us.  The  doctrine  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  through 
justification  by  faith  in  the  atoning  power  of  the  blood 
of  Christ  (the  Christ  for  us)  was  pushed  aside.  But 
the  man  who  brought  this  doctrine  into  a  system  for  the 
people  of  the  fellowship  movement  in  Germany  was 
Pastor  Th.  Jellinghaus.  Through  Bible  schools  which 
he  conducted  and  through  many  publications  which  have 
had  a  wide  circulation  he  has  labored  for  a  life  time  to 
formulate  and  to  systematize,  to  elucidate  and  to  give 
foundations  to  this  doctrine.  He  was  the  acknowledged 
doctrinal  leader,  the  "dogmatician"  of  the  fellowship 
movement.  We  knew  him  personally.  We  heard  him 
teach  at  the  Eisenach  conference  and  at  Meiningen  and 
sat  with  him  at  table  (1902).  He  was  a  man  of  piety 
and  of  a  beautiful  character.  But  now  comes  what  we 
wanted  to  say  of  the  good  conscience  in  teaching  in 
the  Church.  A  few  years  ago  1905-06)  Pastor  Jelling- 
haus while  working  on  a  Bible  Commentary  which  was 
to  give  the  Scripture  ground  for  his  teaching  became 
convinced  that  his  new  system  of  doctrines  was  in  con- 
flict with  the  Scriptures.  More  and  more  the  conviction 
grew  upon  him  that  his  conception  of  sin  had  been  too 
superficial ;  that  he  had  not  taken  the  holiness,  the  jus- 
tice and  the  wrath  of  God  seriously  enough ;  that  his 
rejection  of  the  vicarious  atonement  of  Christ,  of  the 
substitutional   character  of   His   death,   was   in  conflict 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  31 

with  the  Scriptural  significance  of  Christ's  death  as  the 
means  of  our  salvation;  that  his  conceptions  of  re- 
pentance and  faith  contained  many  erroneous  elements. 
Finally,  that  his  doctrine  of  holiness  as  an  immediate 
experience  was  in  conflict  with  the  actual  experiences  of 
Christians  and  had  no  foundation  in  the  Scriptures.  The 
thought  that  he  had  for  a  lifetime  been  teaching  doctrines 
in  conflict  with  the  Scriptures,  and  the  other  thought 
that  he  had  had  such  a  great  following  and  that  many 
had  been  misled  through  him,  so  tortured  his  conscience 
that  he  broke  down  in  his  nerves  and  for  a  time  had  to 
be  confined  to  an  asylum.  But  he  recovered  again  and 
was  dismissed.  While  living  with  his  son-in-law,  a 
pastor,  who  with  many  others  testifies  to  the  normal 
condition  of  his  mind,  he  published  a  "Declaration  on  my 
Doctrinal  Errors"  (Erklaerung  ueber  meine  Lehrirrun- 
gen,  Verlag  von  Prack  &  Co.,  in  Lichtenrade,  60  Pfen- 
ninge),  in  which  he  confesses  before  the  world  the 
mistakes  of  his  life,  with  the  prayer  and  the  hope  that  the 
harm  which  he  has  done  to  the  Church  may  again  be 
rectified  as  much  as  possible.  He  again  returns  to  the 
doctrinal  positions  of  the  Lutheran  Church.  This  cer- 
tainly has  been  a  remarkable  experience.  It  can  teach 
all  of  us  a  serious  lesson.  When  we  undertake  to  teach 
in  the  Church  of  Christ  we  take  upon  ourselves  a  great 
responsibility.  God  will  one  day  take  us  to  account. 
The  question  will  then  not  be :  How  did  you  succeed  in 
entertaining  your  audiences  and  your  classes  ?  but :  How 
did  your  teaching  conform  to  the  Scriptures  as  the  rule 
of  faith?  Let  us  quote  in  this  connection  what  Paul 
says,  I  Cor.  3:11-15:  "For  other  foundation  can  no 
man  lay  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ.  Now 
if  any  man  build  upon  this  foundation  gold,  silver,  pre- 
cious stones,  wood,  hay,  stubble ;  every  man's  work  shall 
be  made  manifest:  for  the  day  shall  declare  it,  because 
it  shall  be  revealed  by  fire;  and  the  fire  shall  try  any 
man's  work  of  what  sort  it  is.  If  any  man's  work  abide 
which  he  has  built  thereupon,  he  shall  receive  a  reward. 
If  any  man's  work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss ; 
yet  so  as  by  fire."    God  grant  that  our  work  may  be  of  the 


32  The  Augsburg  Confe^ssion. 

permanent  kind.  Let  us  not  despise  the  good  guide 
which  we  have  in  the  Confessions  of  our  Church.  There 
we  are  on  Scriptural  ground,  and  with  a  Scriptural  mes- 
sage only  we  can  have  a  good  conscience. 

IX.     Why  is  the  Apostles'  Creed  not  enough? 

It  is  not  always  easy  for  laymen  to  arrive  at  an  appre- 
ciation of  the  doctrinal  principles  of  the  Augsburg  Con- 
fession. Many  of  these  principles  look  to  them  as  being 
of  no  fundamental  significance.  They  observe  that  there 
are  good  Christians  among  those  who  do  not  obligate 
themselves  to  this  Confession.  At  the  same  time  they 
w^ould  not  want  to  go  as  far  as  to  be  opposed  to  any 
kind  of  a  creed.  But  they  think  it  would  be  enough  if 
such  a  creed  would  cover  just  *'the  fundamentals."  The 
Apostles'  Creed  appeals  to  them  as  such  a  statement  on 
the  fundamentals,  and  they  think  that  should  be  enough. 

Let  me  ask  you  again  to  read  what  we  discussed  under 
VL  A  study  of  Church  history,  of  the  causes  which 
produced  the  later  Confessions,  will  lead  us  to  look  at 
this  question  in  an  altogether  different  light.  If  you 
are  tempted  to  depreciate  the  creeds  of  our  Church,  then 
read  John  i6:  13.  Our  creeds  are  monuments  of  how 
Christ  has  kept  the  promise  that  His  Holy  Spirit  shall 
lead  us  in  all  truth.  With  each  new  creed  the  Church  of 
Christ  has  had  a  new  experience  of  truth.  As  we  have 
seen,  the  Apostles'  and  the  Nicene  Creed  repre- 
sent experiences  which  the  Church  has  had  with  refer- 
ence to  the  doctrines  of  Trinity  and  Christology  only. 
At  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  the  Church  had  grown 
so  much  that  it  was  now  ready  to  give  expression  to 
doctrines  of  an  altogether  different  kind,  the  doctrine 
of  sin  and  grace,  of  how  salvation  is  appropriated,  of 
the  Scriptural  relation  between  forgiveness  of  sins  and 
holiness  of  life,  of  the  Sacraments  and  the  conception 
of  the  Church.  Let  us  ask  again :  Why  is  the  Apostles' 
Creed  not  enough?  If  we  consider  this  question  in  the 
light  of  the  experiences  which  the  Church  has  had  under 
the  enlightening  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  which 
have  been  expressed  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  then 


Th^  Augsburg  Con:^ession.  33 

we  know  what  we  have  to  answer.  The  Apostles'  Creed 
is  not  enough.  It  does  not  by  far  cover  all  the  funda- 
mentals. It  covers  only  a  part  of  the  doctrinal  experi- 
ences of  the  Church.  If  we  now,  after  all  these  valuable 
experiences,  should  want  to  go  back  to  the  Apostles'  Creed 
and  should  demand  that  on  this  basis  the  various  denomi- 
nations unite,  would  not  that  be  equal  to  compelling  the 
full  grown  man  to  return  again  to  the  state  of  develop- 
ment of  the  child?  Here  was  the  mistake  of  Syncretism. 
Let  us  not  ignore  what  we  have  been  taught  in  the  period 
of  the  Reformation.  The  principles  of  Romanism,  of 
Anabaptism,  of  Pelagianism,  of  Zwinglianism,  in  oppo- 
sition to  which  the  doctrines  of  the  Augsburg  Confession 
have  been  formulated,  are  standing  out  to-day  as  types  of 
religion  essentially  different  from  the  faith  of  our 
Church.  This  observation  can  confirm  us  in  the  convic- 
tion that  our  Augsburg  Confession  has  given  expression 
to  principles  that  had  a  right  to  be  recorded  as  experi- 
ences of  the  Church  of  the  pure  Word. 

X.     Why  is  Luther's  Small  Catechism  not  Enough? 

This  is  another  question  that  might  be  asked  by  lay- 
men. Here  we  could  not  reply  as  in  the  case  of  the  Apos- 
tles' Creed.  We  could  not  say  that  Luther's  Small  Cate- 
chism does  not  treat  of  the  questions  dealing  with  the 
way  of  salvation.  Luther's  treatment  of  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments, his  exposition  of  the  second  and  third 
articles  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  belong  to  the  most  beauti- 
ful gems  in  the  confessional  literature  of  the  Church. 
And  what  the  Catechism  writes  on  the  Sacraments  is 
even  more  explicit  than  what  the  Augsburg  Confession 
has  on  that  subject. 

And  yet  there  must  be  a  reason  why  so  many  Lutheran 
bodies  have  published  the  Augsburg  Confession  in  their 
hymn  books,  thus  indicating  their  conviction  that  this 
Confession  also  should  be  placed  into  the  hands  of  our 
laymen.  Let  us  here  refer  to  something  that  Prof. 
Kahnis  of  the  Leipzig  University  wrote  in  his  book 
"Luthertum  und  Christentum."  Of  Luther's  Small  Cate- 
chism he  says  (p.  136)  :  "In  evangelical  truth  and  conse- 


34  The:  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

cration  as  well  as  in  popular  simplicity,  clearness  and 
power,  it  surpasses  anything  that  has  ever  been  written 
in  this  respect.  None  of  our  Confessions  have  been  so 
written  in  the  spirit  of  God  as  must  be  said  of  the  Small 
Catechism.  And  next  to  the  Scriptures  no  other  book 
has  so  impressed  the  hearts  of  men."  But  then  Kahnis 
goes  on  to  say:  "But  as  symbolical  writings  both  Cate- 
chisms cannot  claim  the  authority  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession."  He  gives  two  reasons:  (i)  Because  they 
were  not  direct  testimonies  of  the  Church.  (2)  Accord- 
ing to  their  purpose,  they  did  not  give  complete  expres- 
sion to  the  doctrinal  character  of  Lutheranism. 

Here,  then,  are  two  points  of  difference  between 
Luther's  Small  Catechism  and  the  Augsburg  Confession. 
In  the  Catechism  we  have  one  of  the  most  excellent 
private  writings  of  Luther.  But  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion was  prepared  as  a  public  document  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  It  was  as  such  signed  by  the  political  representa- 
tives of  the  young  Church.  And  in  this  Confession,  more 
particularly  in  the  first  twenty-one  articles,  pains  have 
been  taken  ''to  give  complete  expression  to  the  doctrinal 
character  of  Lutheranism." 

The  Catechism  does  not  aim  at  completeness.  As  in- 
stances let  us  mention  a  few  things.  While  the  Cate- 
chism in  the  Ten  Commandments  leads  us  to  see  our 
sins,  it  does  not  give  such  a  carefully  guarded  definition 
of  original  sin  as  the  source  of  individual  sins  as  we 
have  in  Article  II  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  While 
the  teaching  of  the  Catechism  on  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
rests  upon  the  central  doctrine  of  justification,  yet  there 
is  nowhere  in  the  Catechism  such  clear  and  definite 
statement  of  this  great  doctrine  as  we  have  it  in  Article 
IV  of  the  Confession.  Neither  do  we  find  in  the  Cate- 
chism such  statements  of  the  relation  between  justification 
and  sanctification  as  they  are  given  in  Articles  VI  and 
XX  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  The  Catechism,  in  the 
explanation  of  the  third  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
teaches  beautifully  of  the  saving  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
in  the  Church,  but  it  cannot,  according  to  its  plan,  deal 
with  such  principles  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  as  we 


Ths  Augsburg  Concession.  35 

find  them  expressed  in  Articles  VII,  VIII,  XIII,  XIV 
and  XV.  The  Augsburg  Confession  is  an  altogether 
different  kind  of  a  Confession  as  compared  with  the 
Catechism.  Some  of  its  statements  and  principles  may 
appeal  less  to  the  heart,  but  each  one  of  these  principles 
is  an  essential  pillar  under  the  structure  of  the  Church. 
We  cannot  here  go  into  details,  but  must  refer  to  the 
explanation  of  the  articles  in  the  third  part  of  this  book. 

Augsburg  Confession  and  Catechism  mutually  supple- 
ment each  other.  Both  are  adapted  for  laymen  because 
they  are  brief  and  simple.  All  Lutherans  should  be 
thoroughly  at  home  in  the  Small  Catechism.  They 
should  so  know  it  that  they  could  always  repeat  it  for 
their  comfort.  But  Lutherans  who  want  to  be  intelligent 
in  church  matters,  who  care  to  understand  their  Church 
as  distinguished  from  other  churches,  who  desire  to  be 
familiar  with  the  principles  constituting  the  life  of  their 
Church,  Lutherans  who  are  called  upon  to  lead  and  to 
teach  should  be  thoroughly  familiar  with  the  Augsburg 
Confession  as  well  as  with  Luther's  Catechism. 

XI.  What  is  the  Form  of  Concord  and  what  should 
be  our  Attitude  towards  it? 

This  document,  the  last  of  the  confessional  writings  of 
the  Lutheran  Church,  was  written  for  the  purpose  of 
establishing  peace  at  a  time  when,  after  the  death  of 
Luther  and  Melanchthon,  our  dear  Church  was  torn  up 
by  doctrinal  controversies.  These  controversies  were 
not  unnecessary  quarrels,  for  there  were  real  difficulties 
that  had  to  be  settled.  And  it  took  decades  of  serious 
investigation,  meditation  and  discussion  before  an  agree- 
ment could  be  effected.  The  Form  of  Concord  consists 
of  two  parts.  Both  deal  with  exactly  the  same  questions, 
only  that  the  first  part  (Epitome)  treats  of  these  matters 
in  brief  definitions,  while  the  second  part  (solid,  plain 
and  clear  repetition  and  declaration)  gives  a  longer 
exposition. 

The  Form  of  Concord  is  necessarily  more  theological 
in  the  treatment  of  its  subjects  than  the  Catechism  and 
even  the  Augsburg  Confession.  For  this  reason  it  can- 
not claim  the  attention  of  the  laymen  in  the  same  degree 


36  Thi^  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

as  it  will  arrest  the  interest  of  those  that  have  studied 
theology  as  a  science.  Yet  as  an  illustration  of  some  of 
the  doctrinal  principles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
for  the  purpose  of  learning  in  what  directions  a  legitimate 
development  of  Lutheranism  is  to  be  sought  it  is  very 
helpful  to  read  the  corresponding  and  other  additional 
parts  especially  in  the  first  part  of  the  Form  of  Concord, 
Our  book,  in  its  third  part,  therefore,  will  have  frequent 
references  to  the  Form  of  Concord  as  well  as  to  the  other 
confessional  writings  of  our  Church.  The  Form  of 
Concord  is  throughout  a  legitimate  development  of  the 
principles  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  its  definitions 
and  expositions  are  of  the  greatest  value  for  him  who 
wants  to  familiarize  himself  thoroughly  with  the  doc- 
trinal system  of  the  Lutheran  Church. "^ 


*A  student  of  this  book  should  be  in  possession  of  the  people's  edition 
of  the  Book  of  Concord,  or  the  Symbolical  Books  of  the  Evangelical 
Lutheran  Church,  translated  from  the  original  languages,  and  edited  by 
Dr.  Jacobs. 


PART  II 

The  Story  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession 

I.  Growth  of  the  Reformation  Movement.  In  order  to 
arrive  at  a  starting  point  of  this  "Brief  History,"  we  shall, 
invite  the  kind  reader  to  follow  us  back  to  a  critical  mo- 
ment in  the  history  of  the  Reformation.  On  April  26th, 
1 52 1,  Luther  had  left  Worms  where  he  in  such  a  heroic 
way  refused  to  retract  what  he  had  been  teaching.  One 
month  later,  Charles  V  proclaimed  the  ban  of  the  empire 
against  him  and  all  his  friends.  This  meant  that  the  cause 
of  the  Reformation  was  to  be  suppressed  and  its  promot- 
ers and  supporters  to  be  put  to  death.  But  this  so-called 
"Edict  of  \Vorms"  could  not  be  carried  out  in  the  domin- 
ions of  Germany  where  the  princes  were  favorable  to 
Lutheranism.  The  Emperor's  hands  became  tied  as  he 
soon  found  himself  on  terms  of  war  not  only  with  the 
King  of  France  but  also  with  the  Pope.  The  cause  of 
the  Gospel  grew  daily.  Several  nobles  heretofore  indiffer- 
ent now  became  supporters  of  the  Reformation  move- 
ment. These,  together  with  the  Elector  of  Saxony, 
constituted  quite  a  formidable  influence.  It  meant  a 
great  step  forward  in  the  development  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. Up  to  this  time  there  had  been  only  individual 
followers  of  Luther,  but  from  now  on  a  reorganization 
of  the  churches  of  the  dominions  on  the  basis  of  the 
teachings  of  Luther  takes  place,  and  the  princes  as  parts 
of  the  Estates  of  the  Empire,  make  themselves  responsi- 
ble for  the  movement.  The  changed  situation  could  be 
observed  at  the  Diet  of  Spires  in  1526,  where  the  Luth- 
eran princes  had  inscribed  over  their  code  of  arms  the 
words :  "Verbum  Dei  manet  in  aeternum,"  i.  e.,  "The 
word  of  God  remaineth  forever."  The  edict  of  Worms 
was  a  dead  letter.  During  the  years  up  to  1529  the 
foundations  for  the  Lutheran  Church  were  laid,  Luther, 
Melanchthon  and  Bugenhagen  conducted  visitations  and 

37 


38  The  Augsburg  Concession. 

everywhere  the  theologians  of  the  Lutheran  Estates  were 
busy  with  the  work  of  reorganizing  the  Church  on  the 
basis  of  EvangeHcal  principles.  It  was  in  1529  when 
Luther  composed  his  two  Catechisms. 

2.  The  situation  becomes  critical.  In  June,  1528,  at 
Barcelona  the  Emperor  had  concluded  a  peace  with  the 
Pope  and  he  promised  to  use  his  whole  power  in  sup- 
pressing heresy.  By  the  Treaty  of  Cambray,  the  follow- 
ing year,  the  war  with  Francis  I  of  France  was  also 
brought  to  a  conclusion.  In  this  treaty  Charles  and 
Francis  both  promised  each  other  to  suppress  the  Refor- 
mation movement.  Under  such  conditions  another  diet 
was  summoned  to  meet  in  Spires  in  1529.  The  brother 
of  the  Emperor,  Ferdinand  of  Austria,  was  to  preside. 
Here  the  Catholics  were  in  the  majority,  and,  in  harmony 
with  instructions  from  the  Emperor,  resolutions  were 
adopted  which  meant  the  death-knell  of  the  Reformation. 
Against  these  the  Lutherans  entered  a  solemn  protest, 
drawn  up  in  a  carefully  prepared  document  and  signed 
by  the  protesting  princes.  This  act  gave  to  the  Lutherans 
the  name  Protestants.  When  Ferdinand  refused  to  re- 
ceive the  document  it  was  sent  to  the  Emperor  who  was 
at  that  time  in  Italy  and  about  to  be  crowned  by  the 
Pope.  But  neither  was  the  Emperor  inclined  to  listen. 
Having  gained  free  hands  he  is  now  bent  upon  either 
bringing  the  Lutherans  back  again  to  the  Church  or  to 
crush  the  cause  of  the  Reformation.  The  agreement 
between  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope  was  that  Germany 
should  be  cleaned  of  the  Lutheran  heresy.  First,  at- 
tempts should  be  made  to  win  the  Protestant  princes  by 
promises.  If  this  should  not  avail  threats  were  to  be 
used.  The  next  step  should  be  the  use  of  force.  Ferd- 
inand was  to  co-operate  with  an  Austrian  army.  The 
Pope  promised  to  induce  other  princes  to  assist.  After 
the  political  power  of  Protestantism  had  been  crushed, 
the  inquisition  was  to  be  introduced  to  complete  the  work. 
Such  were  the  plans.  The  Romanists  were  rejoicing  that 
the  Emperor  as  protector  of  the  Catholic  faith  would 
soon  be  on  the  ground. 

3.  But  once  more  the  arm  of  the  Bmperor  was  checked. 


Th^  Augsburg  CoNifESSioN.  39 

God  in  His  providence  interfered  with  the  plans  against 
Protestantism.  The  Turks,  under  Sultan  Soliman,  with 
an  army  of  300,000  started  their  new  march  upon 
Vienna,  determined  to  conquer  the  whole  Occident.  Soli- 
man  carried  an  Emperor's  crown  with  him  which  should 
be  placed  upon  his  head  after  the  overthrow  of  the 
empire  of  Charles  V.  In  vain  did  his  brother  Ferdinand 
try  to  make  peace  with  Soliman  in  order  that  the  plans 
against  Protestantism  might  be  carried  out.  It  could  not 
be  done.  This  changed  the  policy  of  the  Emperor.  He 
needed  the  good  will  and  support  of  the  Protestant 
Estates  to  battle  successfully  with  the  Turks.  This  con- 
sideration induced  Charles  to  summon  in  kind  terms  for 
the  spring  of  1530  a  diet  at  Augsburg.  Here  they  would 
all  deliberate  in  mutual  kindness  on  the  religious  cause 
and  at  the  same  time  try  to  agree  on  a  mobilization  plan 
against  the  Turks.  In  the  invitation  of  the  Emperor,  the 
Protestants  were  even  recognized  as  one  party  of  the 
empire,  with  which  the  Romanists  would  negotiate. 

4.  Two  important  colloquies.  The  Protestants,  during 
these  most  critical  years,  felt  their  political  weakness 
because  they  were  doctrinally  divided.  As  early  as  1524, 
it  had  become  evident  that  Zwingli  and  Luther  could  not 
agree  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  Protes- 
tant cities  in  Southern  Germany  leaned  to  the  views  of 
Zwingli,  and  Philip  of  Hessia,  the  most  energetic  of  the 
Protestant  princes,  was  sympathizing  with  him.  So  it 
came  that  in  view  of  the  threatening  attitude  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  forces,  attempts  were  made  to  reach  an 
understanding  in  order  that  the  Protestants  might  be 
able  to  present  a  united  front  to  any  onslaught  on  their 
cause.  Two  conferences  were  held,  both  of  which  are 
memorable  because  here  articles  of  faith  were  drawn  up 
which  afterwards  were  used  as  sources  for  creating  the 
Augsburg  Confession. 

a.  The  Schwahach  Articles  must  have  been  written 
by  the  Wittenberg  theologians,  Melanchthon  and  Luther, 
about  July  or  August  of  1529.*    The  object  in  view  was 

*For  details  see  my  artf-^le  in  Lutheran  Quarterly,  April,  1909,  The 
text  is  in  Jacobs'  Book  of  C  ncord,  Vol.  II. 


40  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

to  effect  an  agreement,  especially  concerning  the  Lord's 
Supper,  between  Brandenburg  and  Saxony  on  one  hand 
and  the  South  German  cities,  who  had  been  leaning  to 
Zwingli,  on  the  other  hand.  So  these  articles  were  a 
kind  of  a  political  document  aiming  at  an  alliance  of  all 
the  German  Protestant  forces  against  the  Emperor  and 
the  Catholic  princes.  For  this  reason  they  were  first 
kept  secret  and  were  not  published  until  the  Augsburg 
diet  was  in  session.  They  did  not,  however,  accomplish 
the  desired  union.  The  South  German  cities  insisted  on 
a  modification  of  the  statements  regarding  the  Real 
Presence  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  To  this  the  princes  of 
Brandenburg  and  Saxony  would  not  agree.  In  that  day, 
the  conscience  on  matters  of  truth  was  the  only  deciding 
factor.  Even  the  laymen  would  not  for  one  moment 
think  of  bridging  over  doctrinal  differences  by  union- 
istic  formulas  for  relieving  a  difficult  situation.  Rather 
would  these  princes  go  down  in  defeat  before  the  Em- 
peror and  suffer  the  loss  of  all  they  had,  even  their  life, 
than  to  make  doctrinal  concessions  against  their  con- 
science. But  w^hile  these  Schwabach  Articles  did  not 
effect  the  desired  union  yet  they  have  served  a  good 
purpose :  on  this  basis  the  doctrinal  articles  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession   (the  first  twenty-one)  were  written. 

b.  The  Marburg  Articles  (text  in  vol.  II  of  Dr. 
Jacobs'  Book  of  Concord)  were  drawn  up  by  Luther  at 
the  close  of  a  colloquy  held  in  Marburg  between  Luther 
and  Zwingli  on  the  26.  and  3d  of  October,  1529.  Philip 
of  Hessia  had  invited  both  parties  to  meet  in  his  palace. 
Here  both  agreed  on  all  doctrines  with  exception  of 
the  one  on  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  the  Marburg  Articles 
are  a  codification  of  agreement  and  disagreement  between 
the  two  reformers.  They  could  not  agree  on  the  Lord's 
Supper.  These  articles  also  may  have  aided  Melanchthon 
in  shaping  the  first  twenty-one  articles  of  the  Augsburg 
Confession. 

5.  Melanchthon's  work  of  writing  the  Confession. 
Melanchthon,  the  co-laborer  of  Luther,  was  an  accom- 
plished master  in  formulating  articles  of  doctrine.  The 
Elector  of  Saxony,  under  whose  government  he,  together 


Tilt  Augsburg  Confession.  41 

with  Luther,  was  teaching  in  the  Wittenberg  University, 
commissioned  him  with  the  important  work  of  formulat- 
ing articles  on  ''doctrines  and  abuses,"  to  be  submitted 
to  the  Emperor  at  the  diet  as  a  defence  of  the  religious 
condition  in  the  Saxon  dominion. 

a.  The  first  plan.  The  opinion  was  held  that  the 
main  thing  would  be  to  explain  to  the  Emperor  why  the 
Lutherans  had  done  away  with  a  number  of  things, 
which  the  Catholics  insisted  upon  as  matters  of  impor- 
tance for  the  maintenance  of  the  Church:  such  as  the 
administration  of  the  communion  by  giving  the  bread 
only,  the  unmarried  life  of  the  clergy,  the  mass,  auricular 
confession,  the  observation  of  ceremonies,  monastic 
vows.  So  Melanchthon  began  his  work  by  writing  the 
articles  which  we  now  have  in  the  second  part  of  our 
Confession.  On  these  questions,  articles  must  have  been 
agreed  upon  at  Torgau  (the  so-called  Torgau  Articles), 
before  leaving  for  Augsburg.  A  work  which  especially 
occupied  Melanchthon  was  a  somewhat  lengthy  introduc- 
tion or  preface  to  those  articles  on  the  abuses.  He 
finished  it  in  Augsburg  and  wrote  about  it  to  Luther 
who  had  been  left  at  Coburg,  a  fortress  near  to  Augs- 
burg. (Luther  could  not  appear  at  Augsburg  because 
the  ban  of  the  Empire  was  upon  him.)  This  introduc- 
tion, which  according  to  later  plans  was  set  aside  in  favor 
of  an  introduction  to  be  written  by  Chancellor  Dr. 
Brueck,  has  recently  been  found  in  the  Nuremberg 
archive,  and  it  is  a  skillfully  written  defense  of  the  reli- 
gious conditions  in  Saxony.  It  must  be  remembered  that 
at  this  time  Melanchthon  was  writing  the  Confession  as 
a  document  which  was  to  be  an  "Apology"  for  the  Elector 
of  Saxony  only.  The  Augsburg  Confession  was  at  first 
not  intended  to  be  the  Confession  of  all  the  Lutherans 
at  Augsburg. 

b.  What  convinced  Melanchthon  that  also  articles  on 
doctrines  should  be  submitted  to  the  Bmperor?  Dr.  Eck, 
the  great  enemy  of  the  Lutherans,  published  a  pamphlet 
containing  404  articles  against  those  that  disturb  the 
peace  of  the  Church.  Here  the  Lutherans  were  put  in 
the  same   class   with  Zwingli,   Carlstadt   and  the  Ana- 


42  The^  Augsburg  Con?e:ssion. 

baptists.  A  copy  of  this  pamphlet  was  sent  to  the 
Emperor.  By  remarks,  with  red  ink  on  the  margin,  the 
Lutherans  were  accused  of  teaching  the  most  radical 
heresies.  Of  this  Melanchthon  heard  in  Augsburg  and 
it  convinced  him  that  the  document,  to  be  submitted  to 
the  Emperor,  should  not  only  be  an  "apology,"  but  a 
confession  as  well.  So  Melanchthon  began  to  write  on 
what  we  now  have  in  the  first  twenty-one  articles.  For 
this  he  could  make  use  of  the  Schwabach  Articles. 

c.  The  first  draft  is  sent  to  Luther.  While  waiting 
for  the  Emperor  to  arrive  at  Augsburg,  Melanchthon 
had  so  far  finished  the  Confession  that  on  May  nth  the 
Elector  could  send  a  special  messenger  to  Luther  at 
Coburg  with  the  document.  Luther  should  look  over  it 
and  feel  free  to  write  suggestions  on  the  margin.  May 
15th  his  answer  came  back:  '1  have  read  over  Magister 
Philip's  Apology.  It  pleases  me  very  well,  and  I  know 
of  nothing  therein  to  be  improved  or  changed ;  nor  would 
it  become  me,  for  I  cannot  move  so  gently.  Christ,  our 
Lord  grant  that  it  may  bring  much  and  great  fruit  as  we 
hope  and  pray."  Luther  could  not  have  expressed  him- 
self so  mildly  as  had  done  Melanchthon  and  as  it  was 
necessary  at  this  occasion.  The  Emperor  did  not  arrive 
until  15th  of  June.  During  all  this  time  Melanchthon 
continued  to  improve  the  Confession,  making  changes 
daily.  Yet  that  first  draft  of  May  nth  was  the  only  one 
sent  to  Luther  before  the  delivery  of  the  Confession. 
There  was  so  complete  harmony  between  Luther  and 
Melanchthon  at  that  time  that  there  was  no  need  of  con- 
stantly keeping  Luther  informed  of  every  change  made. 
Furthermore  the  suspense  in  which  the  Lutherans  lived 
during  those  days  of  awaiting  the  arrival  of  the  Emperor 
was  of  such  a  nature  that  a  historian  has  no  difficulty  in 
understanding  why  Luther  did  not  receive  a  draft  every 
few  days. 

d.  How  did  this  first  draft  compare  with  the  Confes- 
sion as  it  zuas  finally  delivered?  This  would  naturally 
be  an  interesting  question.  What  did  Luther  see  of  the 
articles  in  the  document  as  read  before  the  Emperor? 
We  do  not  know  for  sure,  because  that  first  draft  of  May 


Tnt  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  43 

nth  has  not  been  preserved.  A  draft,  however,  of  a 
later  time,  which  shows  us  in  what  condition  the  Confes- 
sion was  about  the  first  of  June  has  recently  been  dis- 
covered in  the  Nuremberg  Archives  and  was  published 
by  Professor  Kolde  as  "Die  aelteste  uns  bekannte  Redak- 
tion  der  Augsburgischen  Konfession."  It  is  astonishing 
to  see  how  different  the  Confession  in  that  state  of  its 
development  was  from  the  final  form  in  which  it  was 
delivered.  Our  Article  IV  was  there  the  fifth  article.  Ar- 
ticles VII  and  VIII  were  one  article.  Our  article  on  the 
Lord's  Supper  (X)  was  the  ninth  article.  Articles  XX, 
XXI  and  XXVII  were  not  yet  written.  Furthermore, 
in  Article  II  there  was  no  rejection  of  the  Pelagians.  In 
the  article  on  Justification  (now  Article  IV)  there  was 
not  yet  the  sentence :  ''This  faith  God  imputes  for  right- 
eousness in  his  sight. — Rom.  3  and  4."  In  Articles  VII  and 
VIII  (now  Article  VII)  the  phrase  ''in  which  the  Gospel 
is  rightly  taught"  did  not  yet  have  the  word  "rightly." 
Article  VIII  (later  IX)  on  Baptism  simply  empha- 
sized infant  Baptism  and  offered  no  doctrine  of  Baptism. 
In  Article  XVI  (our  seventeenth)  on  Christ's  return  to 
judgment  the  thought  was  expressed  that  the  dead  will 
be  raised  "with  the  very  body  in  which  they  died."  This 
was  changed  in  the  final  reading.  (See  our  interpreta- 
tion of  Article  XVII.)  These  points  can  give  us  an  idea 
of  how  imperfect  the  Confession  must  have  been  when 
Luther  saw  the  first  draft  of  May  nth. 

e.  The  confessional  document  which  Melanchthon 
had  been  preparing  exclusively  in  the  name  of  the  Elec- 
tor of  Saxony  becomes  by  agreement  of  the  several 
Estates  the  common  Confession  of  all  the  Lutherans  at 
Augsburg.  How  did  that  come  about?  The  Emperor 
was  approaching  and  was  soon  expected  to  be  in  Augs- 
burg. Persistent  rumors  that  the  Papists  together  with 
the  Roman  Catholic  princes  had  succeeded  in  making  the 
Emperor  very  suspicious  of  the  Lutherans  and  unfriendly 
to  them  convinced  the  Lutheran  Estates  that  they  should 
stand  together  and  hand  in  a  common  Confession.  There 
was  at  first  a  little  difficulty  with  Philip  of  Hessia.  He 
was  opposed  to  the  sentence  in  Article  X  on  the  Lord's 


44  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

Supper:  "and  we  disapprove  of  those  who  teach  other- 
wise." He  desired  that  Zwingli  and  the  South  German 
cities  should  be  taken  in  too.  But  Melanchthon,  with  the 
others,  was  immovable.  So  Philip  yielded.  Melanch- 
thon's  introduction  which  had  been  prepared  exclusively 
with  reference  to  conditions  in  Saxony  was  now  removed 
and  the  Saxon  chancellor,  Dr.  Brueck,  was  instructed  to 
write  an  introduction  in  the  name  of  all  the  Lutheran 
Estates.  On  the  23d  of  June,  after  a  final  discussion  of 
the  situation,  the  Confession  was  signed  by  the  princes 
who  were  willing  to  identify  themselves  with  the  cause 
of  Lutheranism. 

6.  The  arrival  of  the  Bmperor  took  place  under  very 
spectacular  circumstances.  The  Elector  of  Saxony  car- 
ried the  sword  of  the  Empire  before  him.  To  both  sides 
on  horse  back  could  be  seen  in  gorgeous  attire  the  ambas- 
sadors, Campeggius  and  Pimpinelli.  Next  to  the 
Emperor  in  the  parade  followed  the  bigoted  enemies  of 
the  Reformation,  King  Ferdinand  of  Austria,  Elector 
Joachim  I  of  Brandenburg  and  the  Dukes  of  Saxony  and 
Bavaria.  Right  on  the  first  day  of  meeting  with  the 
Emperor  an  occasion  offered  itself  to  the  Lutherans  to 
give  testimony  of  their  faith.  After  the  ceremonies  of 
welcome  were  over  the  papal  ambassador  lifted  up  his 
hands  to  pronounce  the  benediction  of  the  Pope.  But 
while  all  fell  upon  their  knees  the  Lutheran  princes  re- 
mained standing.  It  took  courage  so  to  act,  but  the 
cause  of  the  Gospel  was  to  them  a  matter  of  conscience, 
and  they  regarded  it  as  their  duty  to  confess  the  truth 
under  all  circumstances.  On  the  following  day  the  Cor- 
pus Christi  procession  was  to  take  place  and  the  Luth- 
erans were  expected  to  participate.  But  they  refused. 
A  controversy  arose  over  the  preaching  on  Sundays.  The 
Emperor  insisted  that  the  Lutheran  ministers  should  not 
preach  during  the  diet.  Margrave  George  of  Branden- 
burg replied  that  for  conscience  sake  he  could  not  forbid 
his  ministers  to  preach  the  Gospel.  He  would  be  willing 
to  lay  down  his  head  before  the  Emperor,  but  could  not 
yield  to  this  demand.  The  Emperor  answered  in  broken 
German:    "Not  head  off,  dear  prince."     Charles  V  was 


Tut  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  45 

not  without  good  traits.  When  his  brother  Ferdinand 
urged  him  to  force  the  Protestants  to  yield,  he  replied: 
'It  becomes  princes  to  be  magnanimous." 

7.  The  opening  of  the  Diet.  On  the  20th  of  June  all 
proceeded  in  a  splendid  procession  to  the  cathedral  where 
the  Diet  was  opened  with  very  impressive  services.  The 
embassador  of  the  Pope  in  addressing  the  Emperor,  ad- 
monished him  to  do  away  with  the  schism  in  the  Church. 
After  the  service  all  marched  in  procession  to  the  conven- 
tion hall.  The  first  question  was  about  the  program  for 
the  Diet.  The  plan  of  the  Romanists  was  first  to  arrive 
at  an  agreement  as  to  the  defence  of  the  empire  against 
the  Turks,  and  then,  after  the  Lutheran  Estates  had 
pledged  themselves,  to  take  up  the  religious  question. 
But  the  Lutherans  insisted  that  the  religious  question 
should  be  the  first  on  the  program.    And  they  prevailed. 

8.  The  situation.  During  the  days  of  the  Augsburg 
Diet  a  comedy  was  presented  on  the  stage,  which  was 
characteristic  of  the  situation:  A  scholar  (Reuchlin) 
appears  with  a  bunch  of  straight  and  crooked  sticks, 
throws  them  down  and  goes.  A  theologian  (Erasmus) 
comes,  and  trying  in  vain  to  make  the  crooked  sticks 
straight,  runs  off.  A  third  man  in  the  garb  of  a  monk 
(Luther)  appears,  and  after  he  had  set  fire  to  the  sticks, 
goes.  Another  in  the  robe  of  the  Emperor  (Charles) 
comes  and  draws  his  sword  against  the  flames,  but  with 
this  he  intensifies  the  fire  and  goes  off  with  indignation. 
At  last  the  head  of  the  church  appears,  and,  consulting 
with  himself  for  a  moment  what  should  be  done  to  ex- 
tinguish the  fire,  beholds  two  vessels,  one  with  oil,  another 
with  water.  He  takes  the  one  with  oil,  pours  it  into  the 
fire  and  runs  off  in  consternation. 

9.  The  delivery  of  the  Confession. 

a.  Attempts  to  prevent  a  public  reading.  The  Em- 
peror and  all  the  Romanists  knew  that  a  public  reading 
of  a  Confession  of  the  Lutherans  would  strengthen  their 
cause.  The  Papal  embassadors  who,  in  co-operation  with 
enemies  of  the  Reformation  like  Dr.  Eck,  had  been  busy 
in  spreading  so  many  lies  against  their  adversaries,  feared 
that  such  a  public  reading  might  explode  most  of  their 


46  The  Augsburg  CoNifEssioN. 

tales.  But  the  Lutherans  were  determined  to  be  heard  in 
public.  On  Friday  afternoon  at  a  certain  moment  all 
Lutheran  princes  arose,  and  Chancellor,  Dr.  Brueck,  as 
their  spokesman,  said  that  they  were  now  ready  for  a 
public  reading  of  their  Confession.  The  Em_peror 
answered  that  it  was  now  too  late  and  that  they  should 
simply  hand  over  to  him  the  document.  Dr.  Brueck 
replied  promptly  that  they  could  not  agree  to  a  disposing 
of  this  important  matter  in  such  a  way.  They  had  been 
too  much  slandered  as  to  what  doctrines  they  hold  and 
therefore  they  owed  it  to  the  truth  to  show  publicly  of 
what  spirit  they  were.  They  would  therefore  plead  with 
the  Emperor  to  permit  a  public  reading.  The  Emperor 
insisted  upon  his  demand.  But  the  Lutherans  did  not 
give  up.  Dr.  Brueck  said :  The  Emperor  had  listened  so 
often  in  cases  of  much  less  importance  and  they  could 
not  believe  that  he  would  now  refuse  in  a  matter  that  had 
so  much  to  do  with  the  welfare  of  the  souls  of  his  sub- 
jects. This  appeal  was  too  much  for  Charles  V,  he 
yielded  and  appointed  the  afternoon  of  the  following  day 
for  the  reading.  As  place  for  the  meeting  he  designed 
the  chapel  of  his  lodging  place  instead  of  the  convention 
hall.  This  perhaps  was  with  the  purpose  of  limiting  the 
hearers,  as  the  chapel  did  not  hold  more  than  about  200 
persons.  Again  the  Emperor  demanded  that  the  docu- 
ment containing  their  Confession  should  be  handed  him 
now.  But  Dr.  Brueck  declared  that  they  could  not  give 
up  the  document  at  this  time,  they  had  been  hurried  in 
the  composition  of  it  and  they  would  yet  like  to  write  a 
clean  copy.  While  this  was  true,  their  fear  was  that 
even  yet  the  intrigues  of  the  Papal  embassadors  might 
succeed  in  frustrating  the  public  reading.  Again  the 
Emperor  yielded. 

b.  The  public  reading  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 
In  the  afternoon  at  3  o'clock,  the  25th  of  June — it  was  on 
a  Saturday — the  palace  of  the  bishop  was  filled  to  its 
utmost  capacity,  and  many  were  standing  outside  before 
the  windows.  All  were  eager  to  hear  the  Confession  of 
the  Lutherans.  Another  trick,  however,  was  tried  by 
the  Romanists  to  minimize  the  effect  of  this  public  read- 


The  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  47 

ing.  While  Dr.  Brueck  stood  there  with  the  Latin  and 
Dr.  Beyer  (another  chancellor  of  the  Saxony)  with  the 
German  copy  in  hand  the  Emperor  demanded  that  the 
Latin  copy  be  heard.  Many  who  were  present  could  not 
have  understood  the  Latin.  At  this  moment  the  Elector 
of  Saxony  arose  and  with  a  firm  voice  insisted  that  since 
they  were  on  German  soil  the  German  copy  should  be 
read.  Again  the  Emperor  yielded.  Now  Dr.  Beyer,  a 
man  with  a  penetrating  voice,  read  loud  and  slowly  word 
for  word  the  articles  of  the  Confession.  He  was  heard 
even  by  the  crowds  standing  outside.  When  Dr.  Beyer 
had  finished,  he  returned  his  copy  to  Dr.  Brueck,  who 
again  handed  both  the  Latin  and  the  German  document 
to  the  secretary  of  the  Emperor.  But  Charles  taking 
both  copies  into  his  hands  put  the  Latin  into  his  pocket 
and  gave  the  German  to  the  archbishop  of  Alayence  to 
be  deposited  in  the  archives  of  the  empire."^ 

c.  What  was  the  effect  of  this  reading?  What  effect 
did  it  have  upon  the  Bmperorf  There  are  different  re- 
ports. Brentz  writes  that  when  the  Confession  was  read 
the  Emperor  slept.  But  when  we  remember  that  the 
reading  took  two  hours,  the  napping  for  a  moment  on  the 
part  of  a  layman  should  not  be  interpreted  as  meaning 
a  lack  of  interest.  Court  preacher  Coelestine  of  Bran- 
denburg remarks  that  the  Emperor  slept  for  a  moment 
only.  Dr.  Schaff  says:  A  moment's  napping  here  does 
not  mean  a  lack  of  interest  in  this  Confession,  for  when 
a  few  weeks  later  the  reply  of  the  Catholics  (the 
''Confutation")  was  read,  Charles  V  was  again  soundly 
asleep.  Jonas  reports  that  the  Emperor  had  watched 
with  a  good  deal  of  interest. — What  effect  did  the  reading 
have  upon  other  Catholics?  Duke  William  of  Bavaria 
said  in  a  friendly  remark  to  the  Elector  of  Saxony:  ''I 
have  been  misinformed  concerning  this  doctrine."  To 
Dr.  Eck,  his  own  professor  at  Ingolstadt,  he  addressed 
this  question:  "Can  you  refute  this  doctrine?"  Eck 
answered:  "With  the  Fathers  I  can,  but  not  with  the 
Scriptures."    "Then,"  the  reply  was,  "I  see  that  the  Luth- 

*The    history    of    these    two    copies    of    our    Confession    will    be    briefly 
related  at  another  place. 


48  The;  Augsburg  CoNifESSiON. 

erans  are  in  the  Scriptures,  and  we  outside."  The 
CathoHc  bishop  Stadion  of  Augsburg  said  after  the  read- 
ing of  the  Confession:  "It  is  the  truth,  the  pure  truth, 
we  cannot  deny  it."  A  beautiful  remark  is  reported  of 
the  Confessor  of  the  Emperor.  He  said  to  Melanchthon : 
''You  have  a  theology  which  can  be  understood  only  by 
one  who  prays  much."  The  Cardinal  Campeggius  is 
reported  to  have  said:  ''Personally  I  could  admit  this 
doctrine,  but  officially  we  must  oppose  it." — What  was 
the  effect  upon  the  Lutherans  themselves?  They  felt 
greatly  encouraged.  They  felt  that  they  had  given  an 
account  of  themselves  as  a  church  and  that  they  had  a 
right  to  exist.  The  Confession  now  became  their  flag 
which  they  were  determined  to  follow.  A  number  of 
cities  subscribed  to  the  Confession  here  at  Augsburg. 
Several  princes  who  joined  later  had  received  the  decid- 
ing impression  at  this  occasion.  Spalatin,  one  of  Luther's 
co-laborers,  wrote:  "This  was  a  day  that  witnessed  one 
of  the  greatest  acts  that  has  even  taken  place  on  this 
globe.  A  Confession  has  been  delivered  in  Latin  and 
German,  so  Scriptural  in  character,  as  the  world  has  not 
heard  the  like  in  a  thousand  years."  Luther  rejoiced  that 
he  had  been  permitted  to  see  this  day  when  the  words 
of  the  Psalmist  (Ps.  119:46)  had  been  fulfilled:  "I 
will  speak  of  thy  testimonies  also  before  Kings,  and  will 
not  be  ashamed."  These  words  of  the  Psalmist  have 
been  used  as  a  motto  over  all  the  editions  of  the  Augs- 
burg Confession. 

10.  Defending  the  Confession. 

a.  A  Confession  of  the  Romanists.  On  the  follow- 
ing day  the  Emperor  convened  the  Catholic  Estates  and 
divines  in  order  to  counsel  with  them  what  should  be 
done.  Dr.  Eck's  advice  was:  The  Emperor  should  not 
argue  any  longer  with  the  Lutherans  but  simply  use  his 
sword.  One  prince  said:  "They  have  delivered  a  docu- 
ment with  black  ink,  the  Emperor  should  now  draw  a 
line  through  it  with  red  ink."  Another  replied  to  this : 
"But  look  out,  the  'presilje'  (red  ink  then  was  prepared 
from  roots  imported  from  Brazil)  may  squirt  into  your 
eyes."    He  referred  to  the  political  power  of  the  Protes- 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  49 

tants.     The  Emperor  himself  felt  that  he  was  not  yet 
ready  for  an  open  break  with  the  Lutherans.    He  needed 
them  in  the  campaign  against  the  Turks.     "Not  yet" 
(nondum) — this    was    all    through    life    the    motto    of 
Charles  V.     Wait  with  striking  until  quite  ready,  but 
then  strike  hard.    So  it  was  resolved  to  prepare  a  refuta- 
tion of  the  Lutheran  Confession  and  to  submit  it  to  the 
Diet.    A  committee  of  theologians  was  appointed  to  do 
the  work.    Dr.  Eck  was  among  them,  with  other  fanatic 
enemies  of  the  Reformation.    These  men  considered  this 
an  excellent  opportunity  to  denounce  Luther's  writings 
in  the  name  of  the  Emperor.    One  chapter  of  the  work 
was  given  the  superscription:    ''The  fruit  of  Luther's 
teaching  as  it  can  be  seen  in  Anabaptism."    They  labored 
hard  to  prepare  a  work  that  should  be  a  general  accusa- 
tion of  Protestantism.     It  comprised  351  pages.     It  has 
recently  been  found  in  the  Vatican.    But  when  this  work 
was  presented  to  the  Emperor  and  the  Estates  on  the 
15th  of  July  it  was  rejected  as  too  long,  too  superficial, 
and  too  insulting.     The  committee  was  told  to  do  the 
work  with  more  modesty,  also  with  more  thoroughness. 
And  then  it  should  be  written  in  the  name  of  the  Emperor 
as  his  own  Confession.     No  wonder  that  the  members 
of  the  committee  felt  humiliated.     They  complained  of 
the  trouble  they  had  with  the  Lutherans.    Luther  wrote 
from  Coburg:    "Poor  carpenters  make  many  chips  and 
spoil   much   lumber."     The   second   attempt  was   again 
a  failure.     In  the  third  endeavor  they  succeeded.    Their 
work  was  accepted.    But  two  secretaries  of  the  Emperor 
had  to  help  them.     On  the  3d  of  August,  thirty-eight 
days  after  the  delivery  of  the  Lutheran  Confession,  it 
was  publicly  read.     The  reading  was  no  success.     The 
secretary  who  read  it  got  badly  mixed  up  in  the  pages 
and  read  things  that  did  not  belong  together.     Worse 
than  this  was  the  poor  theology  of  the  document  and  the 
ridiculous  way  of  proving  points   of   Roman   doctrine 
from  Scripture.    Here  is  an  illustration.    To  prove  that 
the  laymen  are  entitled  to  bread  only  in  the  Communion 
and  should  not  want  wine,  i   Sam.  2 :  36  was  quoted : 
"And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  every  one  that  is  left 


50  The  Augsburg  Con^i^ssion. 

in  thine  house  shall  come  and  crouch  to  him  for  a  piece 
of  silver  and  a  morsel  of  bread,  and  shall  say :  Put  me, 
I  pray  thee,  into  one  of  the  priest's  offices,  that  I  may  eat 
a  piece  of  bread."  The  Lutherans  were  accused  of  hav- 
ing laughed  loudly  during  the  reading.  With  the 
presentation  of  passages  like  these,  they  were  certainly 
excusable.  The  Roman  Catholics  have  always  been 
ashamed  of  this  so-called  ''Confutation."  It  was  a  long 
time  before  it  was  published.  Translated  into  English 
it  is  found  in  vol.  II  of  Dr.  Jacobs'  Book  of  Concord 
(not  the  ''People's  Edition"). 

b.  The  answer  of  the  Lutherans.  The  Lutherans,  of 
course,  wanted  to  reply  and  defend  their  Confession. 
But  they  were  denied  a  copy  of  the  "Confutation."  Then 
they  were  told  that  a  copy  should  be  given  them  if  they 
would  promise  not  to  reply.  This  they  could  not  prom- 
ise. They  were  expected  simply  to  accept  the  Confuta- 
tion as  this  was  the  Emperor's  Confession,  who  could 
and  would  not  tolerate  a  religious  division  in  the  Empire. 
But  the  Lutherans  felt  themselves  bound  in  their  con- 
science to  abide  with  their  own  Confession  of  which 
they  were  convinced  that  it  expressed  the  truth  of  the 
Scriptures.  So  they  felt  that  it  was  their  sacred  duty 
to  defend  their  Confession.  Now  something  arose  which 
aided  Melanchthon  wonderfully  in  meeting  all  the  points 
of  Roman  objection  against  the  Confession  which  they 
had  delivered.  For  a  time  of  three  months  he  was,  on 
the  side  of  the  Lutherans,  part  of  a  large  committee, 
appointed  by  the  Emperor  to  consider  the  possibility  of 
an  agreement.  Here  Melanchthon  met  with  all  the 
thoughts  expressed  in  the  "Confutation."  The  attempt 
to  reach  an  agreement  failed,  as  had  been  predicted  by 
Luther  at  Coburg,  who  knew  too  well  the  spirit  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church.  But  these  three  months'  de- 
liberations with  the  Catholics  so  enriched  the  though'ts 
of  Melanchthon  that  with  the  additional  aid  of  some 
notes  taken  down  during  the  reading  of  the  "Confuta 
tion"  he  was  now  ready  to  write  his  Apology  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession,  a  document  that  has  always  been 
highly  valued  as  a  confessional  writing  of  the  Lutheran 


The  Augsburg  Con^e:ssion.  51 

Church.  The  Apology  was  also  offered  to  the  Emperor 
at  the  Diet  by  Dr.  Brueck.    But  it  was  not  accepted. 

II.  A  brief  review  of  the  history  of  the  texts  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession. 

a.  What  became  of  those  tivo  copies  delivered  at 
Augsburg?  We  heard  that  Charles  V  took  both  to  him- 
self and  then  handed  the  German  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Mayence  to  be  preserved  in  the  archives  of  the  Empire 
while  he  put  the  Latin  copy  into  his  own  pocket. 

What  became  of  the  German  copy?  It  was  deposited 
in  the  archives  of  Mayence.  But  when  the  council  of 
Trent  was  to  be  held,  in  1545,  this  copy  was  taken  to 
Italy  and  never  returned.  It  may  yet  exist  in  some 
archive  of  Italy.  Professor  Haase  of  Jena  has  searched 
the  Vatican  library  for  it,  but  in  vain.  For  two  hundred 
years  it  had  been  believed  that  the  text  in  the  German 
Book  of  Concord  (the  text  used  by  the  Germans  to-day) 
was  identical  with  the  German  copy  delivered  at  Augs- 
burg. When  the  Book  of  Concord,  the  book  containing 
all  the  confessional  writings  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  was 
to  be  published,  the  Elector  of  Brandenburg  sent  his 
court  preacher  Coelestin  to  Mayence  on  the  mission  of 
bringing  home  a  verified  copy  of  the  German  original. 
But  he  was  deceived  by  the  secretaries  of  the  archive 
and  partly  committed  an  act  of  deception  himself.  As 
the  German  original  had  not  been  returned  since  it  was 
sent  to  Trent,  another  copy  of  inferior  value,  dating 
from  a  time  when  the  Confession  was  yet  in  the  process 
of  creation,  had  been  put  in  its  place.  This  copy,  of 
course,  did  not  have  the  signature  of  the  princes. 
Coelestin  added  these  himself.  So  the  Book  of  Con- 
cord received  its  German  text.  Two  hundred  years  later 
George  Gottlieb  Weber  discovered  the  deception  and 
published  it  in  a  work  of  two  volumes  ("Kritische 
Geschichte  der  Augsburg  Konfession"). 

What  became  of  the  Latin  text?  Charles  V  deposited 
it  in  the  archives  of  Brussels,  the  capital  of  the  Nether- 
lands over  which  he  was  ruler  (King)  in  a  special  sense. 
But  when  his  son,  the  fanatic  Philip  II  of  Spain,  had 
ascended  the  throne  and  at  the  time  when  the  Duke  Alva 


52  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

in  the  name  of  the  King  conducted  his  dreadful  persecu- 
tions against  the  Protestants  in  the  Netherlands,  Philip 
wrote  to  him  that  on  his  return  he  should  bring  with  him 
the  Confession  to  Spain  *'in  order  that  they  (the  Protes- 
tants) might  not  hold  it  as  a  Koran/'  and  that  he  should 
"'be  careful  that  the  original  be  given  him,  and  not  a  copy, 
and  that  no  other,  not  even  a  trace  of  it,  be  left,  so  that 
so  pernicious  a  book  may  be  forever  destroyed."  From 
a  receipt  given,  we  know  that  when  Alva  returned  to 
Spain  (1573)  he  took  the  Confession  with  him  which 
has  no  doubt  been  destroyed. 

b.  Now  the  question  will  be  asked :  What  text,  then, 
is  it  zvhich  we  use  in  our  English  Lutheran  churches? 
The  EngHsh  Lutherans  are  a  good  deal  better  off  with 
their  English  text  than  the  Germans  are  with  their  Ger- 
man text.  The  Germans  have  always  to  correct  their 
German  text  after  the  Latin  which  we  have  in  the  Book 
of  Concord,  Our  English  text  is  a  translation  of  this 
Latin  text.  How  did  the  Lutheran  Church  get  this  Latin 
text?  When  the  Lutherans  came  home  from  Augsburg 
Melanchthon  published  the  Confession  in  both  languages. 
You  ask  how  could  that  be  reliably  done  since  the 
originals  were  not  in  his  possession?  But  do  not  forget 
that  he  had  all  the  material  in  hand,  from  which  the 
clean  copies  for  delivery  had  been  made  shortly  before 
the  public  reading. 

c.  Is  there  a  way  for  us  to  find  out  hozv  the  first 
publication  of  Melanchthon  (the  so-called  Bditio  prin- 
ceps  of  1530)  compares  zvith  those  official  copies  delivered 
at  the  Diet?  Although  these  copies  are  lost,  as  we  have 
seen,  yet  we  are  even  here  not  altogether  helpless.  When 
the  Confession  was  in  process  of  preparation,  and  espe- 
cially when  it  was  about  completed,  there  were  copies 
taken  from  it  by  the  different  parties  interested.  There 
are  yet  thirty-nine  of  these  in  existence.  Some  of  them, 
it  is  true,  were  taken  when  the  Confession  was  yet  very 
incomplete.  To  this  class  belongs  the  German  text  in 
the  German  Book  of  Concord.  But  some  of  these  copies 
were  taken  after  the  completion  of  the  document,  at  the 
time  when  the  Lutherans  were  ready  to  deliver  it.  These 


The  Augsburg  Concession.  53 

copies  have  even  the  signatures  affixed,  a  class  of  manu- 
scripts regarded  as  especially  reliable.  From  the  Latin 
text  in  its  completed  form  we  have  six  copies  and  one 
French  translation.  The  late  Prof.  P.  Tschackert  of 
Goettingen  has  done  us  a  service  in  publishing  a  book  in 
which  he,  by  careful  comparison  of  all  those  manuscripts, 
has  created  a  text,  German  and  Latin,  side  by  side,  from 
which  the  original  and  lost  copies  cannot  have  differed 
very  materially.* 

d.  What  do  we  find  when  we  make  the  comparison  f 
We  shall  here  not  go  into  details,  as  we  can  refer  to  our 
pamphlet  on  the  ''Altered  and  the  Unaltered  Augustana" 
published  by  the  German  Literary  Board,  Burlington,  la. 
Only  this  may  be  stated :  Melanchthon  in  his  first  edition 
for  publication  sought  to  improve  the  text  at  a  number 
of  points.  In  that  day  they  did  not  feel  that  an  official 
document  should  not  be  altered. 

e.  Among  the  editions  of  the  Augsburg  Confession, 
which  followed  in  quick  succession,  there  is  one  that  is 
especially  known  as  the  "altered"  Confession  (the 
Variata) .  It  is  the  edition  of  1540.  While  in  the  preced- 
ing editions  the  changes  merely  aimed  at  making  the 
thoughts  clearer,  in  this  edition  there  are  changes  of 
doctrinal  significance  especially  pertaining  to  the  Lord's 
Supper  (Article  X)  and  Free  Will  (XVIII).  These 
alterations  became  the  cause  of  much  controversy  in  the 
Lutheran  Church,  especially  since  there  were  those  who 
under  the  shield  of  these  changes  labored  to  alter  the 
character  of  Lutheranism.  So  it  became  a  custom  in  the 
Lutheran  Church  to  make  a  distinction  between  an  al- 
tered and  an  unaltered  Augsburg  Confession.  Subscrip- 
tion to  the  unaltered  Confession  was  regarded  as  a  better 
safeguard  for  pure  Lutheran  teaching.  This  question  has 
been  thoroughly  treated  in  the  pamphlet  mentioned. 

12.  A  few  remarks  on  the  history  of  the  significance 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 
a.     What  was  the  significance  of  the  Confession  during 

_  *With  the  aid  of  this  book  (Die  unversenderte  Au.srsburgische  Konfes- 
sion,  deutsch  und  lateinisch,  nach  den  besten  Handschriften  aus  dem 
Besitze^  der  Unterzeichner.  Leipzig  1910)  it  is  now  easy  to  make  the 
comparison. 


54  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

the  time  from  the  Diet  at  Augsburg,  1530,  up  to  the  Reli- 
gious Peace  Treaty  at  Augsburg,  1555?    It  must  be  re- 
membered that  at  the  time  when  the  Confession  was 
written  there  was  no  talk  of  creating  a  creed  to  which 
the   pastors    and   churches   should   obligate   themselves. 
The  Confession  was  simply  intended  as  a  document  by 
which  the  Lutherans  wanted  to  give  account  of  their 
»loctrinal  position  before  the  Emperor  and  the  Estates 
of  Germany.     It  was  therefore  the  princes  who  signed 
the   Confession,   not  the   theologians.     Yet  the   feeling 
that  the  essential  principles  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation 
had  here  been  brought  to  an  expression  created  within 
all   followers   of   Luther  a  very  high  esteem   for  this 
document.    All  Lutherans,  of  their  own  free  will,  wanted 
to  be  adherents  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  they 
were  known  by  their  opponents  as  such.    Charles  V  from 
now  on  up  to  the  Religious  Peace  Treaty  at  Augsburg 
was  bent  upon  two  things:     (i)   to  crush  the  political 
power  of  the  Protestants  and  (2)  by  colloquies  and  con- 
ferences to  unite  the  Lutherans  with  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics.     At   these   conferences    the    question    was    always 
asked:     What  do  the  Lutherans  teach  according  to  the 
Confession  delivered  at  Augsburg,  and  what  may  they 
be   induced   to   concede?     At   the   Augsburg   Religious 
Peace  Treaty  the  Lutherans  were  recognized  as  adherents 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and  an  agreement  was  signed 
according  to  which,  among  all  Protestants,  the  adherents 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession  only  should  enjoy  toleration. 
The  Anabaptists,   Zwinglians  and   Calvinists   were   not 
included.     The  Calvinists  tried  to  secure  toleration  by 
saying  that  they  also  could  subscribe  to  the  Confession 
in  the  form  in  which  it  had  been  published  from  1540  on 
(the  altered  edition  with  its  changes  in  Article  X,  where 
the  phrases  ''truly  present"  and  ''they  disapprove  of  those 
who  teach  otherwise"  were  omitted.     See  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Article  X  in  the  third  part  of  this  book). 

b.  What  was  the  significance  of  the  Confession  from 
^555,  ^P  io  the  end  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  1648?  It 
continued  to  be  regarded  as  a  political  document  with  the 
thought  on  the  part  of  the  Romanists — up  to  the  time 


The  Augsburg  Conipession.  55 

of  the  outbreak  of  the  war— that  as  soon  as  it  could  be 
proved  that  the  Lutherans  had  departed  from  the  Confes- 
sion as  it  was  delivered  at  Augsburg,  the  Augsburg  Reli- 
gious Peace  Treaty  was  null  and  void.  During^  this 
period  the  consciousness  of  the  Lutherans  of  the  differ- 
ence between  the  altered  and  the  unaltered  edition  grew. 
Confessional  subscription  to  the  ''unaltered"  Augsburg 
Confession  and  other  confessional  writings,  as  the  case 
was  (first  the  Corpora  doctrinse,  then  the  Book  of  Con- 
cord), on  the  part  of  the  pastors,  was  demanded. 

c.  What  has  been  the  significance  of  the  Confession 
from  the  end  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  (1648)  on  up  to 
our  day?  It  is  from  now  on  merely  a  confessional  docu- 
ment with  no  political  significance  vv^hatever.  Here,  1648, 
at  the  peace  treaty  of  Osnabrueck,  which  concluded  the 
Thirty  Years'  War,  for  the  first  time  since  the  days  of 
the  Emperor  Theodosius  the  Great  (385),  the  principle 
of  the  freedom  of  conscience  in  religious  matters  was 
recognized.  (Of  course,  there  was  the  fatal  restriction 
contained  in  the  paragraph  which  gave  to  the  individual 
princes  the  right  to  create  uniformity  of  faith  within 
their  own  borders  by  forcing  those  who  refused  conver- 
sion to  emigrate.  Cuius  regio,  eius  religio.  This  brought 
the  Salzburgers  to  our  country.)  From  now  on  the  dis- 
cussion regarding  the  Augsburg  Confession  has  been  con- 
fined to  its  theology,  and  a  rich  literature  has  sprung  up. 
All  Lutheran  churches  in  all  countries,  if  they  do  not  de- 
mand subscription  to  all  the  confessional  writings  of  the 
Lutheran  Church,  demand  at  least  subscription  to  the 
Augsburg  Confession. 


PART  III 

An  Interpretation  of  the  Articles 
of  the  Augsburg  Confession 


The  Augsburg  Confession* 

DELIVERED  TO   THE   EMPEROR    CHARLES  V.,  AT  THE 
DIET  OF  AUGSBURG,  A.  D.   1530. 


[This  Translation  is  made  from  the  Latin  Editio  Princeps  of  1530-31,  the 
authority  of  which,  equally  with  that  of  the  German  Editio  Princeps,  sur- 
passes all  other  known  Editions.  It  has  been  carefully  prepared  by  a 
Joint  Committee  of  The  General  Council,  The  General  Synod,  The  United 
Synod  of  the  South,  and  the  Joint  Synod  of  Ohio,  as  a  Common  Standard 
of  The  Augsburg  Confession  in  English.  The  words  in  brackets  are 
inserted  from  the  German  Editio  Princeps.} 


PREFACE 


Most  Invincible  Bniperor,  Cccsar  Augustus,  most  Clement  Lord: 
Inasmuch  as  Your  Imperial  Majesty  has  summoned  a  Diet 
of  the  Empire  here  at  Augsburg  to  deHberate  concerning 
measures  against  the  Turk,  that  most  atrocious,  hereditary  and 
ancient  enemy  of  the  Christian  name  and  religion,  in  what  way 
effectually  to  withstand  his  furor  and  assaults  by  strong  and 
lasting  military  provision;  and  then  also  concerning  dissen- 
sions in  the  matter  of  our  holy  religion  and  Christian  Faith, 
that  in  this  matter  of  religion  the  opinions  and  judgments  of 
parties  might  be  heard  in  each  other's  presence,  and  considered 
and  weighed  among  ourselves  in  charity,  leniency  and  mutual 
kindness,  to  the  end  that  the  things  in  the  Scriptures  which  on 
either  side  have  been  differently  interpreted  or  misunderstood, 
being  corrected  and  laid  aside,  these  matters  may  be  settled 
and  brought  back  to  one  perfect  truth  and  Christian  concord, 
that  for  the  future  one  pure  and  true  religion  may  be  embraced 
and  maintained  by  us,  that  as  we  all  serve  and  do  battle  under 
one  Christ,  so  we  may  be  able  also  to  live  in  unity  and  con- 
cord in  the  one  Christian  Church.  And  inasmuch  as  we,  the 
undersigned  Electors  and  Princes,  with  others  joined  with  us, 
have  been  called  to  the  aforesaid  Diet,  the  same  as  the  other 
Electors,  Princes  and  Estates,  in  obedient  compliance  with  the 
Imperial  mandate  we  have  come  to  Augsburg,  and,  what  we 
do  not  mean  to  say  as  boasting,  we  were  among  the  first  to  be 
here. 

Since  then  Your  Imperial  Majesty  caused  to  be  proposed  to 
the   Electors,    Princes    and    other   Estates   of   the   Empire,    also 


*The  text  of  the  Confession  is  that  of  the  People's  Edition  of  the  Book 
of  Concord,  translated  from  the  Latin  and  edited  by  Dr.  H.  E.  Jacobs  and 
published  by  the  General  Council  Publication  Board,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

59 


6o  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

here  at  Augsburg  at  the  very  beginning  of  this  Diet,  among 
other  things,  that,  by  virtue  of  the  Imperial  Edict,  the  several 
Estates  of  the  Empire  should  present  their  opinions  and  judg- 
ments in  the  German  and  Latin  languages,  after  due  delibera- 
tion, answer  was  given  to  Your  Imperial  Majesty,  on  the 
ensuing  Wednesday,  that  on  the  next  Friday  the  Articles  of  our 
Confession  for  our  part  would  be  presented. 

Wherefore,  in  obedience  to  Your  Imperial  Majesty's  wishes, 
we  offer,  in  this  matter  of  religion,  the  Confession  of  our 
preachers  and  of  ourselves,  showing  what  manner  of  doctrine 
from  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  pure  Word  of  God  has  been 
up  to  this  time  set  forth  in  our  lands,  dukedoms,  dominions  and 
cities,  and  taught  in  our  churches.  And  if  the  other  Electors, 
Princes  and  Estates  of  the  Empire  will  present  similar  writings, 
to  wit,  in  Latin  and  German,  according  to  the  said  Imperial 
proposition,  giving  their  opinions  in  this  matter  of  religion,  here 
before  Your  Imperial  Majesty,  our  most  clement  Lord,  we, 
with  the  Princes  and  friends  aforesaid,  are  prepared  to  confer 
amicably  concerning  all  possible  ways  and  means,  as  far  as  may 
be  honorably  done,  that  we  may  come  together,  and,  the  matter 
between  us  on  both  sides  being  peacefully  discussed  without 
offensive  strife,  the  dissension,  by  God's  help,  may  be  done  away 
and  brought  back  to  one  true  accordant  religion ;  for  as  we  all 
serve  and  do  battle  under  one  Christ,  we  ought  to  confess  the 
one  Christ,  and  so,  after  the  tenor  of  Your  Imperial  Majesty's 
Edict,  everything  be  conducted  according  to  the  truth  of  God, 
which,  with  most   fervent  prayers,  we  entreat  of  God. 

But,  with  regard  to  the  other  Electors,  Princes  and  Estates, 
if  they  hold  that  this  treatment  of  the  matter  of  religion  after 
the  manner  w^hich  Your  Imperial  Majesty  as  so  wisely  brought 
forward,  namely,  with  such  mutual  presentation  of  writings  and 
calm  conferring  together  among  ourselves,  should  not  proceed, 
or  be  unfruitful  in  results;  we,  at  least,  leave  behind  the  clear 
testimony  that  we  decline  or  refuse  nothing  whatever,  allowed 
of  God  and  a  good  conscience,  which  may  tend  to  bring  about 
Christian  concord;  as  also  Your  Imperial  Majesty  and  the 
other  Electors  and  Estates  of  the  Empire,  and  all  who  are 
rnoved  by  sincere  love  and  zeal  for  religion,  and  who  will 
give  an  impartial  hearing  to  this  matter,  will  graciously  perceive 
and  more  and  more  understand  from  this  our  Confession. 

Your  Imperial  Majesty  also,  not  only  once  but  often,  gra- 
ciously signified  to  the  Electors,  Princes  and  Estates  of  the 
Empire,  and  at  the  Diet  of  Spires  held  A.  D.  1526,  according 
to  the  form  of  Your  Imperial  instruction  and  commission 
given  and  prescribed,  caused  it  to  be  stated  and  publicly  pro- 
claimed, that  Your  Majesty,  in  dealing  with  this  matter  of 
religion,  for  certain  reasons  which  were  alleged  in  Your 
Majesty's  name,  was  not  willing  to  decide  and  could  not 
determine  anything,  but  that  Your  Majesty  would  diligently 
use  Your  Majesty's  office  with  the  Roman  Pontiff  for  the  con- 


The  Augsburg  Coni^kssion.  6i 

veiling  of  a  General  Council,  as  the  same  was  publicly  set  forth 
at  greater  length  over  a  year  ago  at  the  last  Diet  which  met 
at  Spires.  There  Your  Imperial  Majesty,  through  his  High- 
ness Ferdinand,  King  of  Bohemia  and  Hungary,  our  friend 
and  clement  Lord,  as  well  as  through  the  Orator  and  Imperial 
Commissioners,  caused  this,  among  other  things,  to  be  pro- 
claimed: that  Your  Imperial  Majesty  had  known  of  and  pon- 
dered the  resolution  of  Your  Majesty's  Representative  in  the 
Empire,  and  of  the  President  and  Imperial  Counsellors,  and 
the  Legates  from  other  Estates  convened  at  Ratisbon,  concern- 
ing the  calling  of  a  Council,  and  that  this  also  was  adjudged 
by  Your  Imperial  Majesty  to  be  of  advantage;  and  because 
the  matters  to  be  adjusted  between  Your  Imperial  Majesty 
and  the  Roman  Pontiff  were  nearing  agreement  and  Christian 
reconciliation.  Your  Imperial  Majesty  did  not  doubt  that  the 
Roman  Pontiff  could  be  induced  to  hold  a  General  Council; 
therefore  Your  Imperial  Majesty  himself  signified  that  he 
would  endeavor  to  secure  the  Chief  Pontiff's  consent  together 
with  Your  Imperial  Majesty  to  convene  such  General  Council, 
and  that  letters  to  that  effect  would  be  publicly  issued  with  all 
possible  expedition. 

In  the  event,  therefore,  that  the  dift'erences  between  us  and 
the  other  parties  in  the  matter  of  religion  cannot  be  amicably 
and  in  charity  settled  here  before  Your  Imperial  Majesty,  we 
offer  this  in  all  obedience,  abundantly  prepared  to  join  issue 
and  to  defend  the  cause  in  such  a  general,  free,  Christian  Coun- 
cil, for  the  convening  of  which  there  has  always  been  accordant 
action  and  agreement  of  votes  in  all  the  Imperial  Diets  held 
during  Your  Majesty's  reign,  on  the  part  of  the  Electors, 
Princes  and  other  Estates  of  the  Empire.  To  this  General 
Council,  and  at  the  same  time  to  Your  Imperial  Majesty,  we 
have  made  appeal  in  this  greatest  and  gravest  of  matters  even 
before  this  in  due  manner  and  form  of  law.  To  this  appeal, 
both  to  Your  Imperial  Majesty  and  to  a  Council,  we  still  adhere, 
neither  do  we  intend,  nor  would  it  be  possible  for  us,  to  relin- 
quish it  by  this  or  any  other  document,  unless  the  matter 
between  us  and  the  other  side,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the 
latest  Imperial  citation,  can  be  amicably  and  charitably  settled 
and  brought  to  Christian  concord,  of  which  this  also  is  our 
solemn  and  public  testimony. 

ARTICLE  ONE. 
Oi^  God. 

Our  churches,  with  common  consent,  do  teach,  that  the  decree 
of  the  Council  of  Nicpea  concerning  the  Unity  of  the  Divine 
Essence  and  concerning  the  Three  Persons,  is  true  and  to  be 
believed  without  any  doubting;  that  is  to  say,  there  is  one  Divine 
Essence   which   is   called   and    which   is   God :     eternal,   without 


62  The  Augsburg  Coni-kssion. 

body,  without  parts,  of  infinite  power,  wisdom  and  goodness,  the 
Maker  and  Preserver  of  all  things,  visible  and  invisible;  and 
yet  there  are  three  Persons,  of  the  same  essence  and  power, 
who  also  are  co-eternal,  the  Father,  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 
And  the  term  "person"  they  use  as  the  Fathers  haveused  it,_  to 
signify,  not  a  part  or  quality  in  another,  but  that  which  subsists 
of  itself. 

They  condemn  all  heresies  which  have  sprung  up  against  this 
article,  as  the  Manicheans  who  assumed  two  principles  (gods), 
one  Good,  and  the  other  Evil;  also  the  Valentinians,  Arians, 
Eunomians,  Mohammedans,  and  such.  They  condemn  also  the 
Samosatenes,  old  and  new,  who  contending  that  there  is  but 
one  Person,  sophistically  and  impiously  argue  that  the  Word 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  not  distinct  Persons,  but  that  "Word" 
signifies  a  spoken  word,  and  "Spirit"  (Ghost)  signifies  motion 
created  in  things. 

1.  Why  is  the  reference  here  to  "the  decree  of  the 
Council  of  Nicea,"  and  not  to  the  Apostles'  Creed? 

The  Nicene  Creed  was  always  regarded  in  a  special 
sense  as  the  foundation  of  orthodoxy  (so  at  the  Councils 
of  Constance  1414-18  and  at  Trent  1545-63),  because  it 
had  the  expressed  sanction  of  the  orthodox  fathers  at  the 
first  oecumenical  council  at  Nicea  (325)  and  was  again 
formally  adopted  at  the  second  oecumenical  Council  at 
Constantinople  (385).  The  Apostles'  Creed  was  a 
gradual  growth,  a  development  of  the  Baptismal  For- 
mula, and  had  never  been  formally  adopted  by  the 
Church.  The  aim  of  Melanchthon  here  is  to  meet  the 
accusation  of  Dr.  Eck  that  the  Lutherans  were  not  in 
harmony  with  the  Catholic  Church  on  the  doctrine  of 
God. 

2.  How  does  our  Confession  state  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity? 

(i)   There  is  only  one  God,  one  divine  Essence. 

(2)  But  there  are  three  ''persons''  in  this  one  divine 
Essence. 

(3)  As  this  word  ''person"  can  easily  be  misunder- 
stood and  cannot  claim  to  be  an  adequate  expression  of 
what  the  ''persons"  in  the  Trinity  means,  this  word 
''person''  is  defined:  a.  negatively:  "not  a  part  or 
quality  in  another"  (against  the  Samosatenes,  see  below)  ; 


The:  Augsburg  Coni^i^ssion.  63 

b.  positively :  "but  that  which  subsists  of  itself."  The 
practical  meaning  is  that  to  each  of  the  three  persons  can 
be  applied  the  personal  pronouns :  "I,"  "Thou,"  "He." 
To  each  one  can  be  attributed  a  distinct  work.  The  best 
illustration  as  to  what  is  meant  by  persons  in  the  Trinity 
we  have  in  Luther's  explanation  of  the  Articles  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed.  Of  God  the  Father  he  says  that  He 
"has  created  me  and  all  that  exists ;  that  He  has  given 
and  still  preserves  to  me  my  body  and  soul  .  .  .  ;  that 
He  daily  provides  me  abundantly  .  .  .  protects  me, 
.  .  .  and  preserves  me."  Of  Christ  he  says  that  He 
was  "begotten  of  the  Father  from  eternity  ...  is  my 
Lord ;  who  has  redeemed  me  ...  in  order  that  I  might 
be  His  .  .  ."  Of  the  Holy  Ghost  He  confesses  that  He 
"has  called  me  through  the  Gospel,  enlightened  me  by 
His  gifts,  and  sanctified  and  preserved  me  in  the  true 
faith ;  .  .  .  daily  forgives  abundantly  all  my  sins,  and 
will  raise  up  me  and  all  the  dead  at  the  last  day." 

(4)  The  three  persons  are  equally  God  (against 
Arianism,  see  below). 

(5)  This  one  God  is  ''eternal,  zvithout  body,  zuithoiit 
parts,  of  infinite  pozver,  zvisdom  and  goodness,  the  Maker 
and  Preserver  of  all  tilings,  visible  and  invisible."  The 
point  is  that  while  the  Triune  God  is  to  be  thought  of  in 
"persons"  yet  he  is  above  all  human  limitations. 

3.  Which  are  the  heresies  rejected? 

The  Errorists  here  mentioned  can  be  divided  into  three 
classes : 

(i)   Those  who  deny  the  one  essence. 

a.  The  ''Manicheans  who  assumed  two  principles 
(Gods),  one  good,  and  the  other  evil." 

b.  The  Valentinians  (a  kind  of  Gnostics)  who  taught 
a  multiplicity  of  deities  coming  forth  from  a  divine 
source  in  pairs. 

(2)  Those  who  teach  one  God,  but  deny  that  this  one 
God  exists  in  three  persons. 

a.  The  Mohammedans  who  emphasized  the  oneness 
of  God,  rejecting  the  persons,  but  thus  lost  the  reality 
of  God.    The  Mohammedans  are  an  exception  among  all 


64  The:  Augsburg  Confi:ssion. 

others  here  mentioned.  They  stand  alone  as  having  no 
relation  to  Christianity.  Why  were  they  mentioned?  It 
must  have  been  because  Dr.  Eck  in  his  pamphlet  put  the 
Lutherans  on  the  level  with  the  Turks  ("worse  than  the 
Turks"). 

b.  The  Samosatenes,  the  followers  of  the  heretic 
bishop  Paul  of  Samosata,  making  the  Word,  or  the  Son, 
a  mere  power  with  which  the  man  Jesus  was  endowed, 
and  also  making  the  Holy  Spirit  an  impersonal  power. 
The  Samosatenes  are  here  qualified  by  the  remark:  "old 
and  new."  By  the  "w^w'^are  meant  certain  men  at  the  time 
of  the  Reformation  who  rejected  the  Trinity  (such  as 
Denk,  Hetzer,  who  again  were  followed  by  Joris,  L.  and 
F.  Socinus).  Melanchthon  had  such  as  Denk  and  Hetzer 
in  mind.  They  considered  God  as  an  abstract  unity,  de- 
nied the  divinity  of  Christ  and  regarded  the  Spirit  as 
an  impersonal  power.  Hetzer  particularly  taught,  as  our 
Confession  here  says,  "that  the  Word  and  Holy  Ghost 
are  not  distinct  persons,  but  that  'Word  signifies  a  spoken 
word,  and  that  Spirit  signifies  the  motion  created  in 
things.' "  All  these  heresies,  and  others,  we  find  in 
Unitarianism  of  to-day.  But  Unitarianism  is  not  confined 
to  the  few  bearing  the  name  Unitarians.  The  Univer- 
salists,  the  Cincinnati  "Protestants,"  the  Swedenborgians, 
the  Russellites,  and  the  Christian  Scientists  reject  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  including  in  this  the  denial  of  the 
essential  divinity  of  Christ.  The  same  position  is  taken 
by  many  liberalists  in  whatever  denomination  they  may 
be  found.  The  "Christians"  (Campbellites)  also  have  an 
aversion  against  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity.  All  these 
we  would  to-day  understand  as  coming  in  under  the  term 
of  our  Confession :  the  "new"  Samosatenes. 

(3)  Those  who  admit  three  persons  but  who  subor- 
dinate Son  and  Spirit  to  the  Father. 

a.  The  Arians.  From  the  beginning  there  were  those 
in  the  Church  who  thought  that  the  Father  was  the  real 
God  and  that  the  Son  was  a  being  subordinate  to  the 
Father,  and  God  in  a  secondary  sense  only.  At  first  this 
view  was  not  regarded  as  heretical.  But  when  the  bishop 
Arius  came  and  developed  it  to  a  consistent  doctrine  and 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  65 

taught  that  Christ  had  been  created  by  the  Father  and 
that  He  had  not  been  in  existence  from  all  eternity  and 
was  not  of  the  same  essence  as  the  Father,  then  the 
Church  saw  the  danger  of  this  subordination-idea  and 
condemned  the  doctrine  at  the  first  synod  ever  held,  the 
oecumenical  synod  at  Nicea,  325.  The  consideration  was 
this :  There  is  no  guarantee  of  our  redemption,  if  Christ 
was  not,  as  the  Nicene  Creed  says,  the  ''only  begotten 
Son  of  God"  (against  the  "created"  of  Arius),  and  be- 
gotten ''before  all  words,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light, 
very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made,  being  of  one 
substance  with  the  Father."  Melanchthon,  in  our  Con- 
fession, describes  the  persons  of  the  Trinity  as  "of  the 
same  essence  and  power,  who  are  also  co-eternal." 

b.  The  Bunomians  are  the  extreme  wing  of  the  Arians 
who  went  so  far  as  to  say  that  there  was  no  likeness 
between  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The  relation  of  the 
Eunomians  to  the  Arians  is  that  of  the  superlative  to  the 
comparative  in  grammar. 

4.  Can  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  claim  the  signifi- 
cance of  a  fundamental  doctrine? 

a.  There  are  those  who  say  that  it  cannot.  They  say 
the  term  "Trinity"  is  not  found  in  the  Scriptures.  This 
is  true.  But  no  one  who  takes  his  Bible  seriously  can 
deny  that  the  substance  is  there.  We  learn  that  God  is 
one  and  that  He  manifested  Himself  in  three  persons. 
(Remember  what  we  said  above  on  the  word  "persons.") 

b.  Then  they  point  to  the  speculative  character  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  as,  for  instance,  exhibited  in  the 
Athanasian  Creed.  And  yet  while  we  admit  that  the 
passages  of  this  Creed,  in  their  endeavor  to  bring  to  our 
understanding  as  near  as  possible  the  great  mystery  of 
the  Trinity,  sound  speculative,  could  we  do  without  them 
in  our  believing  and  praying,  in  our  teaching?  In  the 
exercise  of  our  practical  piety,  that  is  if  we  want  to  be 
in  harmony  with  the  language  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
we  cannot  make  use  of  the  one  divine  Essence  without 
assuming  a  manifestation  in  persons  with  a  special  rela- 
tion to  each  other  and  to  the  world.     A  God  as  the 


(£  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

Mohammedans  and  the  Indians  of  America  believe  in  is 
of  no  comfort  to  the  sinner.  In  Christ  only  we  have  a 
reflection  of  the  heart  of  the  Father.  But  of  Christ  we 
would  know  nothing  except  through  the  Holy  Spirit. 

c.  Finally  they  say  that  a  doctrine  so  diificult  to  un- 
derstand cannot  possibly  he  intended  to  be  believed  by 
man  as  a  condition  of  his  salvation.  But  understanding 
and  believing  should  not  be  so  identified.  The  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity  is  a  mystery  which  we  can  never  under- 
stand fully.  We  can  only  catch  glimpses  of  it.  But 
different  from  not  understanding  this  doctrine  is  to  reject 
and  to  ridicule  it  as  the  Antitrinitarian  teachers  have 
done.  It  is  a  doctrine  of  fundamental  importance  for  the 
teaching  of  the  Church  which  is  entrusted  with  the  care 
of  souls.  And  even  simple  Christians,  although  they  may 
not  appreciate  the  doctrine  connectively  as  theologians 
can,  the  more  they  are  real  living  Christians  the  more 
will  they  be  practical  believers  in  the  Holy  Trinity. 

ARTICLE  TWO. 
Oe  Original  Sin. 

Also  they  teach,  that  since  the  fall  of  Adam,  all  men  begotten 
according  to  nature,  are  born  with  sin,  that  is,  without  the  fear 
of  God,  and  with  concupiscence;  and  that  this  disease,  or  vice 
of  origin,  is  truly  sin,  even  now  condemning  and  bringing  eternal 
death  upon  those  not  born  again  through  baptism  and  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

They  condemn  the  Pelagians  and  others,  who  deny  that  the 
vice  of  origin  is  sin,  and  who,  to  obscure  the  glory  of  Christ's 
merit  and  benefits,  argue  that  man  can  be  justified  before  God  by 
his  own  strength  and  reason. 

I.  What  is  to  be  said  on  the  importance  of  this 
article? 

We  keep  in  mind  that  Article  IV  on  Justification  is  the 
central  article  of  our  Confession.  And  now  this  Article 
II  establishes  the  need  of  justification.  As  Melanchthon 
says  in  the  Apology :  ''The  recognition  of  original  sin  is 
necessary.  For  the  magnitude  of  the  grace  of  Christ 
cannot  be  understood,  unless  our  diseases  be  recognized." 
(Book  of  Concord,  p.  80.)     Article  II  of  original  sin  is 


Thk  Augsburg  Concession.  (i'j 

the  organic  basis  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith. 
Claus  Harms  says :  ''He  who  rejects  original  sin  over- 
throws the  whole  of  Christianity." 

2.  Where  does  our  article  trace  the  origin  of  man's 
sinful  condition? 

a.  Back  to  the  ''Fall  of  Adam"  in  paradise.  It  is 
inherited.  Therefore  it  is  called  ''disease  or  vice  of 
origin."  The  term  "original  sin"  is  not  found  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  the  doctrine  is  there.  In  Romans  5:12  we 
read :  "Wherefore  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world  and  death  by  sin ;  and  so  death  passed  upon  all 
men,  for  that  all  have  sinned."  In  John  3 :  6  the  Lord 
says :   "That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh." 

Parallel  passages  on  the  subject  of  Original  Sin  are 
found  in  the  Apology,  Article  II ;  Smalcald  Articles,  Part 
II,  Article  I;   Form  of  Concord,  Article  I  (pp.  493,  and 

573). 

b.  But  tracing  our  sinful  condition  backward  zve  must 
stop  zvith  ''the  Fall  of  Adam.''  We  must  not  go  still 
further  back,  even  to  the  creation  of  man  as  the  Mani- 
cheans  did  who  said  that  he  was  created  by  an  evil  being 
(Compare  Article  XIX  of  our  Confession  on  the  Cause 
of  Sin).  If  this  was  true  then  man  could  not  be  re- 
deemed. Sin  does  not  belong  to  our  substance,  but  it  has 
come  into  man  as  something  foreign  to  him.  He  was 
created  in  the  image  of  God  (Gen.  i :  27),  and  this  image 
which  was  lost  in  the  fall  of  Adam  is  to  be  restored  again 
(Eph.  4:  24;  Col,  3  :  10)  through  the  regenerating  power 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or,  as  our  article  says,  by  being  "born 
again  through  baptism  and  the  Holy  Spirit." 

3.  Does  our  article  have  anything  on  the  extent  of 
original  sin? 

It  says  that  "all  men,  begotten  according  to  nature,  are 
born  with  sin."  So  Christ  is  excluded  because  He  was 
born  in  a  supernatural  way  through  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  But  Mary,  the  mother  of  our  Lord,  is 
included  (against  the  Roman  Catholic  Church)  as  she 
was  "begotten  according  to  nature." 


68  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

4.  What  definition  of  original  sin  do  we  find  here? 

*'Born  with  sin,  that  is  without  the  fear  of  God,  with- 
out trust  in  God,  and  with  concupiscence."  First  some- 
thing negative  and  then  something  positive  is  mentioned. 
(In  the  German  text  the  order  is  reversed.) 

a.  N'egafive:  "Without  the  fear  of  God,  without  trust 
in  God."  In  the  second  edition  of  the  Confession,  Mel- 
anchthon  took  the  Uberty  of  expressing  it  this  way :  ''and 
can  have  by  nature  no  true  fear  of  God,  no  true  love  of 
God,  no  true  faith  in  God."  We  can  have  by  nature  a 
false  fear,  or  an  instinctive  fear  of  God,  but  not  a  true 
fear.  So  we  may  also  have  a  false  trust  in  God,  or  a 
relying  on  His  kindness  which  forgets  that  He  cannot 
be  love  at  the  expense  of  His  holiness.  Let  us  be  careful 
to  note  what  our  fathers  at  Augsburg  meant  by  this.  In 
the  Apology,  Melanchthon  points  to  the  German  copy  of 
the  Confession  to  show  that  it  was  not  any  sinful  act, 
but  the  inability  of  fearing  and  trusting  God  that  they 
had  had  in  mind  when  writing  the  Confession.  We  must 
distinguish  between  the  mability  of  fearing  and  trusting 
God  and  the  actually  not  fearing  and  trusting  Him.  Dr. 
Krauth  says :  ''There  must  be  something  in  a  child  that 
can  love  before  it  does  love,  and  that  something  is  born 
with  the  child."  (Conservative  Reformation,  p.  387.) 
There  is  a  lack  of  power  to  fear,  trust  and  love  God  with 
a  true  fear,  trust  and  love. 

b.  Positive:  "and  with  concupiscence."  The  old 
translation  ("and  with  evil  propensities")  was  mislead- 
ing. Our  Confessors  did  not  have  in  mind  any  individual 
outbreaks  of  the  evil  within  us,  but  they  meant  the  de- 
pravity which  is  the  source  of  all  evil  inclinations. 
Neither  does  concupiscence  have  special  reference  to  the 
sexual  desires  nor  to  the  perv-erted  and  polluted  exercise 
of  them.  The  word  concupiscence  is  here  used  as  Paul 
does,  Romans  7 :  7  and  8.  Here  he  speaks  of  a  "lust" 
that  has  "wrought  in  me  all  manner  of  concupiscence." 
As  Luther  says  that  he  had  begun  to  learn  "not  what  sins 
are,  but  what  sin  is."  Luther  speaking  of  original  sin 
says :  "This  sin  is  not  done  like  all  other  sin,  but  it  is,  it 
lives  and  does  all  sin,  it  is  the  essential  sin  which  does  not 


Th^  Augsburg  Confession.  69 

sin  for  an  hour  or  for  a  certain  time,  but  wherever  and 
as  long  as  the  person  is  there  and  that  long  is  this  sin 
also."  Therefore  Paul,  Romans  7,  calls  it  sin  fourteen 
times,  and  he  names  the  law  of  sin  warring  against  the 
law  of  the  mind,  an  evil,  a  sinning  sin.  If  concupiscence 
had  reference  chiefly  to  the  sins  of  the  sixth  command- 
ment then  many  prominent  sins  would  be  left  out  of 
consideration :  pride,  hatred,  envy,  and,  above  all,  the 
many  sins  springing  from  selfishness.  (Compare  Col. 
2:18;  2  Cor.  10:2;  Gal.  3:3;  3:19.)  Melanchthon 
says :  "Flesh,  when  contrasted  with  spirit,  does  not  mean 
a  part  of  man,  but  the  whole  man  consisting  of  soul  and 
body.  .  .  .  Original  sin  is  a  living  impulse  producing 
fruits,  i.  e.,  sins,  in  all  parts  of  man  and  at  all  times  of 
his  being,  sins  many  of  which  the  natural  man  does  not 
regard  as  sins :  covetousness,  unholy  ambition,  hatred, 
envy,  jealousy,  pride,  lust,  wrath  and  so  forth.  So  un- 
fathomable is  the  corruption  that  its  true  character  can  be 
learned  only  through  the  law  of  God,"  (Loci,  ed.  of 
Plitt,  pp.  119,  133.)  Dr.  Krauth:  "It  (this  concupis- 
cence) is  that  in  which  all  other  sins  in  some  sense  take 
their  origin.  It  throws  its  life  into  them;  without  it 
they  might  not  be :  it  is  not  only  original,  it  is  also  the 
originating  sin,  or  that  sin  which  gives  the  origin  to  all 
others."     (Conservative  Reformation,  p.  390.) 

5.  Why  does  our  Confession,  after  having  given  the 
definition  of  v^hat  original  sin  is,  add  the  statement 
"that  this  disease,  or  vice  of  origin  is  truly  sin"? 

The  Roman  Church  (on  the  basis  of  its  peculiar  con- 
ception of  the  image  of  God  in  man)  was  teaching  this: 
The  natural  depravity  is  something  indifferent,  neither 
good  nor  bad,  and  not  properly  speaking  sin.  It  only 
becomes  sin  when  it  develops  into  sinful  acts.  This 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Church — in  theology  we  call  it 
Semi-Pelagianism — was  the  source  of  the  work-right- 
eousness and  all  the  evils  connected  therewith.  (Compare 
the  close  of  our  article.)  Here  our  Confession  had  to 
clarify  things.  The  question  may  be  asked :  How  can 
the  inability  to  fear  and  to  trust  and  to  love  God  be 


70  Th^  Augsburg  Confession. 

reall}^  sin?  We  answer:  It  is  a  violation  of  the  first 
commandment  which  is  the  sum  of  all  the  command- 
ments. It  is  a  real  want  of  conformity  with  God's  law. 
It  is  being  otherwise  than  God  wants  us  to  be.  And 
regarding  "the  concupiscence"  it  is  by  no  means  anything 
indifferent,  or,  as  the  Catholics  say,  even  an  incentive 
for  the  better  powers  in  man,  but  it  is  the  very  thing  that 
is  forbidden  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  commandments.  It 
is,  as  the  Apology  calls  it,  "enmity  against  God,  an 
habitual  corruption."  Compare  the  quotations  under  the 
preceding  questions  (4,  b).  According  to  Luther  in  the 
Smalcald  Articles,  this  corruption  is  so  deep  and  awful 
that  man  can  know  it  only  from  revelation. 

6.  What  are  the  natural  consequences  of  original 
sin? 

Our  text  says  that  it  is  "even  now  condemning  and 
bringing  eternal  death."  (a)  ''Death!'  What  God  had 
threatened  took  place  :  "In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof 
thou  shalt  surely  die."  (Gen.  2:  17.)  This  means  not  only 
temporal  death,  the  fearful  separation  of  body  and  soul 
(Ps.  90:  7  and  11),  but  eternal  death  which  "is  the  eternal 
state  of  the  soul  reunited  with  the  body  and  separated 
from  God."  (Jacobs.)  (b)  "Even  nozv."  The  penalty 
for  the  state  of  depravity  was  not  confined  to  the  first 
parents,  but  it  is  visited  upon  every  one  of  their  posterity, 
because  they  have  actually  inherited  this  condition:  the 
inability  to  fear,  trust  and  love  God  and  the  lust  for  evil. 

7.  What  is  the  remedy  for  the  evil? 

Eternal  death  shall  be  visited  only  upon  these  "who  are 
not  born  again  through  baptism  and  the  Holy  Ghost." 

a.  Regeneration  is  necessary.  There  is  no  salvation 
of  any  human  creature  without  a  change  from  the  de- 
praved condition  into  which  he  is  born.  Dr.  Krauth 
remarks:  Even  those  who  reject  infant  baptism  usually 
have  some  kind  of  explanation  how  children  are  made 
acceptable  to  God  without  baptism  which  our  Church 
regards  as  the  ordinary  means  of  regeneration.  If  they 
seek  for  no  such  explanation  they  are  outright  Pelagians. 
(What  Pelagianism  is  will  be  explained  under  question 


The:  Augsburg  Coni-1':ssion.  71 

8.)  As  to  the  absolute  necessity  of  regeneration  for  every 
human  creature  the  testimony  of  Scripture  is  very  clear. 
Jesus  says :  "Except  a  man  (that  is  anyone  and  everyone) 
be  born  again,  he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God."  If 
there  is  anyone  who  wants  to  evade  the  force  of  these 
words,  let  him  read  what  the  Lord  adds :  ''That  which 
is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,"  that  is:  every  human  being 
born  naturally  into  this  world  is  fleshly,  and  needs  a  new 
birth  (John  3:6).  A  child  may  seem  innocent  as  con- 
trasted with  an  adult,  its  sin  may  even  seem  to  lend  a 
charm  of  vivacity  to  the  young  life ;  but  the  first  budding 
of  sin  is  in  essence  the  same  as  in  the  grey-haired  old 
reprobate.  A  person  of  good  character  is  looked  upon  as 
not  needing  regeneration  in  order  to  enter  into  the  King- 
dom of  God.  But  in  this  second  article  of  our  Confes- 
sion we  deal  with  the  moral  nature  of  man,  which  is  de- 
praved, no  matter  how  many  excellencies  the  character 
of  an  individual  may  have.  Let  us  distinguish  between 
character  and  nature  in  this  question.  The  young  ruler 
whom  Jesus  loved  had  a  better  character  than  Judas,  but 
both  had  the  same  nature,  a  nature  that  was  not  regener- 
ated (Dr.  Krauth,  Conservative  Reformation,  pp.  415, 
416,  420). 

b.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  the  sole  author  of  our  regenera- 
tion. We  cannot  effect  the  new  birth  ourselves,  out  of 
powers  of  our  own.  Here  the  adult  is  as  helpless  as  the 
infant.  The  adult  can  with  reflective  consciousness  de- 
sire the  new  life,  which  the  infant  cannot,  but  even  such 
conscious  desire  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  "Not 
by  works  of  righteousness  which  we  have  done,  but 
according  to  His  mercy  He  saved  us,  by  the  washing 
of  regeneration,  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(Titus  3:5).  Regeneration  which  is  a  mystery  to  us  can 
be  wrought  only  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  "Before  the  true 
doctrine  of  the  supreme  and  sole  necessity  of  the  Holy 
Spirit's  work,  as  the  author  of  regeneration,  the  great 
mystery  of  infant  salvation  passes  away."  (Krauth, 
p.  425.)- 


*Here  and  in  the  thoughts  presented  under  question  4  we  have  the 
connecting  link  between  Articles  II  and  XVIII,  I  he  eighteenth  article 
dwells  upon  the  truth  that  man  with  the  powers  of  his  will  cannot  bring 
about  his  conversion,  but  that  this  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


']2  The  Augsburg  Concession. 

c.  Baptism  is  the  ordinary  means  of  the  new  birth. 
Article  IX  treats  of  Baptism  in  a  special  way,  and  there 
we  find  the  statement  that  it  ''is  necessary  for  salvation." 
This  of  course,  does  not  mean  that  a  person  can  under  no 
circumstances  experience  the  new  birth  except  he  has 
been  baptized.  If  Baptism  is  not  obtainable  for  him,  or 
if  he  does  not  know  of  its  necessity  then  God  will  not 
hold  him  responsible.  But  God  will  hold  him  responsible 
if  he  is  unwilling  to  be  baptized  and  despises  the 
Sacrament. 

8.  Which  are  the  errorists  rejected? 

Our  article  closes :  **They  condemn  the  Pelagians  and 
others,  who  deny  that  the  vice  of  origin  is  sin,  and  who, 
to  obscure  the  glory  of  Christ's  merits  and  benefits,  argue 
that  man  can  be  justified  before  God  by  his  own  strength 
and  reason?" 

a.  Who  are  the  Pelagians?  Pelagius  was  the  oppo- 
nent of  the  great  bishop  Augustine  about  410.  He 
taught  that  the  fall  of  Adam  has  had  no  influence  upon 
his  posterity.  Every  man  to-day  is  born  in  a  state  of 
innocence  and  has  the  power  of  choice  the  same  as  Adam. 
The  Pelagians  deny  the  source  of  sin,  the  depravity. 
Concupiscence  (in  the  sense  as  we  have  spoken  of  it 
under  4,  b)  is  to  them  no  sin,  but  something  innocent,  a 
necessary  part  of  man's  original  nature.  There  is  no  sin 
before  there  are  sinful  acts.  Alan  is  in  perfect  possession 
of  the  freedom  to  work  out  his  own  salvation.  With 
such  a  teaching  it  is  evident  that  the  redemption  of  Christ 
is  not  necessary.  Pelagianism,  therefore,  works  "to 
obscure  the  glory  of  Christ's  merits  and  benefits"  and 
argues  "that  man  can  be  justified  before  God  by  his  own 
strength  and  reason." 

b.  What  are  zve  to  understand  by  the  words  ''and 
others"?  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  the  first 
place  the  Semi-Pelagianism  of  the  Roman-Catholic 
Church  was  meant.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  meets 
Pelagianism  half  way.  The  Romanists  will  not  go  so  far 
as  to  say  that  the  fall  of  the  first  parents  has  had  no 
influence  upon  the  race.     They  admit  that  we  have  been 


The:  Augsburg  Conj^kssion.  73 

zveakened  in  our  moral  powers.  But  they  deny  our  total 
depravity  and  the  real  smfulness  of  our  evil  inclination, 
of  the  lust  or  the  concupiscence.  Here  they  will  say  like 
the  Pelagians  that  there  is  no  sin  before  there  are  sinful 
acts.  The  Pelagians  had  no  real  need  of  grace  and  the 
Holy  Spirit,  as  man  is  thought  to  be  perfectly  able  to 
save  himself  ;  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  will  say :  Man 
can  save  himself  with  some  aid  of  divine  grace  to  assist 
him  in  his  somewhat  weakened  condition.  The  position 
of  our  Confession  is  that  man  has  suffered  such  a  de- 
pravity and  has  so  lost  his  free  will  in  spiritual  things 
that  he  depends  upon  the  Holy  Spirit  to  create  in  him  a 
new  spiritual  life.  According  to  Pelagianism  the  natural 
man  is  zuell,  according  to  Romanism  he  is  zveak,  accord- 
ing to  Lutheranism  he  is  "dead  in  trespasses  and  sins." 

It  has  been  a  matter  of  discussion  whether  also 
Zzvingli  was  meant  as  belonging  to  these  ''others."  (See 
on  this  question  Krauth,  p.  448;  Zoeckler,  Augsburg 
Confession,  p.  154;  Plitt,  Augustana,  II,  p.  129.)  It  can 
hardly  be  denied  in  view  of  the  whole  situation.  In  the 
Confession  which  Zwingli  sent  to  Charles  V  in  Augsburg 
he  says :  "Whether  we  will  or  will  not,  we  are  forced  to 
admit  that  original  sin  as  it  is  in  the  sons  of  Adam,  is  not 
properly  sin  .  .  .  for  it  is  not  a  deed  contrary  to  the 
law.  It  is,  therefore,  properly  a  disease  and  a  condition." 
In  a  letter  to  Urban  Rhegius  in  Augsburg  he  says: 
''What  could  be  clearer  than  that  original  sin  is  not  sin, 
but  a  disease?"  Dr.  Krauth  remarks  that  Zwingli's  mis- 
take is  the  ordinary  one.  He  can  see  the  character  of  sin 
only  in  the  deed,  not  in  the  moral  nature  which  produces 
the  deed.  According  to  him,  as  with  many  people,  sin 
cannot  be,  but  it  must  always  be  done. 

If  we  examine  carefully  then  we  will  find  that  the  doc- 
trine of  this  second  article  of  our  Confession  is  rejected 
by  the  following  denominations :  The  Socinians,  Unitar- 
ians, the  German  Evangelical  Protestants  of  Cincinnati 
and  other  cities,  the  Universalists,  the  Swedenborgians 
(these  as  outright  Pelagians,  compare  question  8,  a)  ; 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  Greek  Catholic  Church,  the 
Campbellites,  the  Mennonites,  the  Quakers,  the  Seventh 


74  The  Augsburg  Coni'Ession. 

Day  Adventists  (these  as  Semi-Pelagians,  compare  ques- 
tion 8,  b). 

ARTICLE  THREE. 

Oi^  THE  Son  of  God. 

Also  they  teach  that  the  Word,  that  is,  the  Son  of  God,  did 
take  man's  nature  in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  so 
that  there  are  Two  Natures,  the  divine  and  the  human,  in- 
separably conjoined  in  one  Person,  one  Christ,  true  God  and 
true  man,  who  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  truly  suffered,  was 
crucified,  dead  and  buried,  that  he  might  reconcile  the  Father 
unto  us,  and  be  a  sacrifice,  not  only  for  original  guilt,  but  for  all 
actual  sins  of  man.  He  also  descended  into  hell,  and  truly  rose 
again  the  third  day;  afterward  He  ascended  into  heaven,  that 
He  might  sit  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  and  forever  reign, 
and  have  dominion  over  all  creatures,  and  sanctify  them  that 
believe  in  Him,  by  sending  the  Holy  Ghost  into  their  hearts,  to 
rule,  comfort  and  quicken  them,  and  to  defend  them  against  the 
devil  and  the  power  of  sin.  The  same  Christ  shall  openly  come 
again  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead,  etc.,  according  to  the 
Apostles'  Creed. 

It  is  at  once  clear  that  there  should  be  between  Articles 
II,  of  Original  Sin,  and  IV,  of  Justification,  one  treating 
of  the  Son  of  God.  Jesus  is  the  Redeemer  from  sin,  and 
His  work  is  the  meritorious  cause  of  the  sinner's  justifi- 
cation. Zoeckler  calls  this  article  the  dynamic  centre  in 
the  body  of  saving  truths. 

We  find  here  no  errorists  expressly  mentioned  and 
enumerated.  There  was,  however,  already  at  that  time 
a  doctrinal  difference  between  Luther  and  Zwingli  on  the 
two  natures  in  the  person  of  Christ,  and  it  seems  that  the 
emphasis  of  our  article  upon  the  personal  union  of  the 
two  natures  was  directed  against  the  Swiss  reformer. 
And  against  the  Church  of  Rome  in  particular  the  fol- 
lowing words  are  directed :  ''not  only  for  original  guilt, 
but  for  all  actual  sins  of  men."  The  Papal  Church  taught 
that  the  death  of  Christ  had  been  for  the  original  guilt 
only,  and  that  for  the  actual  sins  there  should  be  satis- 
faction on  the  part  of  man. 

It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  our  article  did  not  yet 
regard  it  necessary  to  take  notice  of  those  who  denied 
the  divinity  of  Christ.     True,  the  germs  of  our  modern 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  75 

rejection  of  Christ's  divinity  existed  already  in  the  teach- 
ings of  some  of  the  Anabaptists,  the  ''new''  Samosatenes 
of  which  we  heard  in  Article  I  (question  3).  But  such 
voices  were  so  few  that  a  refutation  and  silencing  of  them 
was  not  considered  necessary.    How  different  it  is  to-day ! 

I.  What  does  our  article  teach  with  respect  to  the 
origin  of  the  Saviour? 

"Also  they  (that  is  the  Lutheran  churches)  teach  that 
the  Word,  that  is  the  Son  of  God,  did  take  man's  nature 
in  the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary." 

a.  By  calling  the  Son  of  God  ''the  Word,"  our  Con- 
fession reminds  us  of  Christ's  pre-existence  as  taught  in 
John  1:1:  "In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the 
Word  ivas  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God."  Christ 
had  no  beginning.  He  existed  with  the  Father  from  all 
eternity.  Through  Him  all  things  were  made  (John 
1:3).  When  God  created  the  world,  the  Son  was  not 
among  the  things  created.  But  at  that  time  the  Son  (the 
Word)  ''was"  already  existing. 

b.  When  the  time  was  fulfilled  the  incarnation  of 
Christ  took  place  in  order  that  He  might  be  the  Alediator 
of  man's  salvation.  Where  was  the  initiative  in  this  act 
of  incarnation f  The  Ebionites.  a  sect  in  the  early 
Church,  taught  that  the  man  Jesus  (who  did  not  exist 
from  eternity)  had  led  such  a  virtuous  life  that  He  was 
adopted  as  Son  of  God.  The  Socinians,  at  the  time  of  the 
Reformation,  developed  this  view  into  an  elaborate  sys- 
tem, according  to  which  Christ  was  a  mere  man,  though 
a  great  prophet,  who  became  adopted  as  Son  of  God. 
But  in  our  article  we  read  not  that  man  became  God, 
but  "that  the  Word,  that  is  the  Son  of  God,  did  take 
man's  nature!'  The  initiative  in  the  act  of  incarnation 
was  taken  by  the  Son  of  God,  the  eternal  Word.  Ration- 
alistic Christology  of  to-day  is  Ebionitic  and  Socinian. 

c.  The  Virgin  Birth.  This  incarnation  took  place  "in 
the  womb  of  the  blessed  Virgin  ]\Iary."  This  will  always 
remain  an  essential  part  in  our  creed.  Without  the  Virgin 
birth  the  true  divinity  of  Christ,  especially  His  sinless- 
ness,  cannot  be  maintained. 


"^6  The:  Augsburg  Conjpession. 

d.  Christ  assumed  human  nature.  Not  a  human  per- 
son already  existing,  else  we  would  have  had  two  persons, 
a  divine  and  a  human,  contrary  to  i  Tim.  2 :  5.  But  the 
Son  of  God  did  take  man's  nature  which  is  common  to 
us  all.  Hence  He  redeemed  not  a  particular  man,  but  all 
men  as  partakers  of  the  nature. 

2.  What  does  our  article  emphasize  regarding  the 
personal  union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ? 

''So  that  there  are  Two  Natures,  the  divine  and  the 
human,  inseparably  conjoined  in  one  Person,  one  Christ, 
true  God  and  true  man." 

a.  Under  the  preceding  question  we  heard  of  the  act 
of  incarnation  by  which  two  natures  were  united  into  one 
person.  Here  we  have  the  result  of  this  act:  the  personal 
union  as  a  condition  in  Christ,  the  Saviour  of  man.  Our 
Lutheran  Church  has  always  laid  much  emphasis  upon 
this  union  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ. 

b.  The  discussion  of  the  relation  of  the  tzvo  natures 
in  the  history  of  doctrines.  The  relation  of  the  two 
natures  in  Christ  was  most  thoroughly  discussed  in  the 
first  half  of  the  fifth  century.  The  question  was  then 
settled  at  the  two  oecumenical  councils  held  at  Ephesus 
(431)  and  Chalcedon  (451),  and  the  doctrinal  state- 
ments adopted  can  be  found  in  the  second  half  of  the 
Athanasian  Creed.  There  were  two  extremes  between 
which  a  union  had  to  be  found :  The  Nestorians  believed 
in  two  natures,  but  not  in  a  real  personal  union  of  these 
two  natures;  they  practically  believed  in  two  separate 
persons.  The  other  extreme  (Monophysitism)  took  the 
position  that  in  reality  there  was  in  Christ  after  His 
incarnation  only  one  nature  which  was  a  mixture  of  the 
divine  and  the  human.  The  first  of  these  views  was 
irreconcilable  with  the  true  divinity  of  Christ,  the 
second  with  His  true  humanity.  In  the  Reformation  age 
this  question  came  up  again  as  a  difficulty  between  Luther 
and  Zwingli,  and  here  were  the  roots  of  their  differences 
on  the  Lord  's  Supper.  Zwingli,  in  his  doctrine  of  the 
person  of  Christ,  so  tenaciously  denied  the  participation 
of  the  one  nature  in  the  life  and  experiences  of  the  other 


The:  Augsburg  Coni^sssion.  'j'j 

that  the  reaHty  of  the  personal  union  was  lost.  Wher- 
ever in  the  Scriptures  something  human  is  ascribed  to 
Christ's  divinity,  or  something  divine  to  His  humanity, 
there  Zwingli  would  say  that  it  was  not  so  meant,  that  it 
was  simply  the  custom  of  the  Scriptures,  in  a  merely 
rhetorical  way,  to  say  something  of  one  nature  which, 
strictly  speaking,  can  be  said  only  of  the  other.  This  was 
Zwingli's  ''alloiosis"  which  was  emphatically  rejected  by 
Luther.  Luther  emphasized  the  person  of  Christ,  the 
personal  union  embracing  the  two  natures :  "One  Christ, 
true  God  and  true  man."  The  "two  natures,  the  divine 
and  the  human"  are  "inseparably  conjoined  in  one 
person." 

c.  The  practical  religious  interest  in  this  seemingly 
speculative  question.  Luther  said :  If  Christ's  human 
nature  can  have  no  part  in  the  attributes  of  His  divinity, 
if  His  glorified  body  has  no  part  in  the  attribute  of  omni- 
presence, then  Christ  cannot  be  present  with  His  human- 
itv  at  the  Lord's  Supper.  And  Zwingli  said:  Because 
Christ  is  omnipresent  only  according  to  His  divine 
nature,  but  not  with  His  human  nature,  therefore  Christ 
can  be  present  at  the  Supper  only  in  a  spiritual  way, 
but  not  with  His  humanity  which  is  confined  to  a  certain 
place  at  the  right  hand  of  God.  Yet,  Luther's  doctrine 
of  the  person  of  Christ  was  not  a  mere  invention  for 
the  purpose  of  furnishing  a  support  for  the  doctrine  of 
the  Real  Presence  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  No,  what 
Luther  wanted  to  establish  with  his  strong  emphasis  upon 
the  personal  union  was  nothing  less  than  the  full  value 
of  the  atonement  wrought  by  Christ,  the  Godman.  If 
the  humanity  of  Christ  is  so  separated  from  His  divinity 
that  there  is  no  real  communion,  no  communication  of 
the  divine  attributes  to  the  humanity,  then  there  is  no 
real  validity  in  the  sufferings  of  Christ.  Luther  writes: 
"If  the  devil  should  persuade  me  that  in  Christ  a  mere 
man  was  crucified  and  died  for  me,  then  I  would  be  lost, 
but  if  I  can  attach  to  it  the  importance  that  Christ  died 
for  me  as  real  God  and  IMan,  then  such  doctrine  will 
outweigh  and  destroy  sin,  death,  hell  and  all  misery." 
And  again  with  reference  to  Zwingli's  theory :   "Beware, 


78  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

beware,  I  tell  you  of  the  alloiosis,  it  is  a  mask  of  the 
devil !  For  in  the  end  it  constructs  a  Christ,  after  which 
I  would  not  like  to  be  a  Christian ;  a  Christ  whose  suffer- 
ings and  life  do  not  mean  more  than  that  of  any  ordinary 
saint." 

3.  What  is  to  be  noted  regarding  the  states  of 
Christ? 

There  is  the  distinction  between  the  state  of  humilia- 
tion and  the  state  of  exaltation.  This  part  is  much  like 
that  in  the  second  article  of  the  x^postles'  Creed. 

a.  The  state  of  humiliation  is  described  with  the  fol- 
lowing words :  "who  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  truly 
suffered,  was  crucified,  dead  and  buried."  The  thought 
here  to  be  emphasized  is  that  not  only  the  man  in  Christ 
suft'ered  this,  but  the  Godman.  The  Word,  that  is  the 
Son  of  God  who  became  incarnated  and  united  Himself 
with  the  humanity,  experienced  these  acts  of  humiliation 
in  the  human  nature.  Neither  was  the  suffering  of  the 
Godman  a  delusion  (as  some  Gnostics  said)  ;  to  meet 
such  thoughts  we  read  here :  "truly  suffered."  In  the 
German  text  we  have :  "wahrhaftig  geboren." 

b.  The  state  of  exaltation  begins  with  the  words: 
"He  also  descended  to  hell."  ''He  also,"  that  means  the 
same  person  of  which  wx  have  spoken,  the  Godman. 
Everywhere  this  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  personal 
union.  Then  follow  the  other  parts  belonging  to  the 
exaltation  of  Christ :  His  resurrection,  His  ascension, 
His  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  and  His 
return  to  judgment.  But  note  the  way  in  which  His 
sitting  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father  is  here  spoken  of : 
"That  He  might  sit  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father, 
and  forever  reign,  and  have  dominion  over  all  creatures, 
and  sanctify  them  that  believe  in  Him,  by  sending  the 
Holy  Ghost  into  their  hearts,  to  rule,  comfort  and  quicken 
them,  and  to  defend  them  against  the  devil  and  the 
power  of  sin."  This  is  the  purpose  of  it  all.  The  evident 
intention  of  our  article  is  to  emphasize  that  Christ  is  a 
living  Saviour.  He  is  not  like  Mohammed  who  invented 
a  religion  and  then  passed  away  without  being  more  to 
his  followers  than  a  person  that  had  once  lived. 


The  Augsburg  Confkssion.  79 

4.  What  doctrine  of  atonement  do  we  find  in  this 
article? 

It  is  the  doctrine  of  vicarious  atonement.  Christ,  the 
Godman,  experienced  the  humiliation  in  order  ''that  He 
might  reconcile  the  Father  unto  us,  and  be  a  sacrifice." 
It  is  not  man  who  is  to  be  reconciled  to  God,  by  receiving 
impressions  of  God's  kindness,  so  that  He  might  give  up 
his  enmity  against  God.  No,  it  is  God  who  is  to  be  recon- 
ciled. The  German  text  speaks  of  God's  wrath  which  is 
to  be  appeased  ("versoehnet").  In  connection  with  this 
the  death  of  Christ  can  have  no  other  but  a  substitutional 
significance.  Article  IV  also  says  that  Christ  ''by  His 
death,  hath  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins."* 

ARTICLE  FOUR. 

Of  Justification. 

Also  they  teach,  that  men  cannot  be  justified  before  God  by 
their  own  strength,  merits  or  works,  but  are  freely  justified  for 
Christ's  sake  through  faith,  when  they  believe  that  they  are 
received  into  favor  and  that  their  sins  are  forgiven  for  Christ's 
sake,  who,  by  His  death,  hath  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins. 
This  faith  God  imputes  for  righteousness  in  His  sight.  Romans 
3  and  4. 

I.  What  can  v/e  say  in  appreciation  of  this  article? 

This  article  is  the  centre  of  the  doctrines  treated  in 
the  Confession.  The  leading  question  for  Luther  was 
not:  Who  is  God,  and  what  do  we  know  of  Him?  but: 
How  can  I  come  to  God  and  be  assured  that  He  is  my 
Father?  This  had  already  been  the  question  during  the 
middle  ages.  Only  it  had  not  been  answered  right.  The 
advice  had  been  given  that  we  should  efTect  communion 
with  God  through  the  doing  of  good  works.  This  could 
never  bring  the  assurance  of  favor  with  God  to  the  dis- 
tressed sinner  as  he  would  always  be  troubled  with  the 
fear  whether  he  had  done  enough.     Luther  found  the 

*Passages  in  the  other  Confessions  that  should  be  studied  in  connection 
with  this  article  are  the  following:  Apology,  Article  III;  Smalcald  Arti- 
cles, Part  I;  Small  Catechism,  Creed,  Article  II;  Larger  Catechism,  Creed, 
Article  II;  Form  of  Concord,  Article  VIII  in  both  parts. 


8o  The:  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

answer  of  the  Gospel  to  that  question.  It  is :  BeHeve  in 
Christ  who  has  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins  and  on 
account  of  whose  merits  God  justifies  freely  the  believ- 
ing sinner  who  suffers  under  the  burden  of  his  guilt. 
This  doctrine  brings  peace  to  the  soul  and  is  (as  will  be 
shown  in  articles  VI  and  XX)  the  true  source  of  real 
good  works.  How  Luther  himself  valued  this  article 
can  be  seen  from  the  following  words  found  in  the  Smal- 
cald  Articles  (Part  II,  Article  I)  :  "Of  this  article 
nothing  can  be  yielded  nor  surrendered,  even  though 
heaven  and  earth  and  all  things  should  sink  to  ruin.  .  .  . 
And  upon  this  article  all  things  depend,  which,  against 
the  Pope,  the  devil,  and  the  whole  world,  we  teach  and 
practice.  Therefore  we  must  be  sure  concerning  this 
doctrine  and  not  doubt,  for  otherwise  all  is  lost,  and  the 
Pope  and  devil  and  all  things  against  us  gain  the  victory 
and  suit."  (Book  of  Concord,  p.  312.)  And  in  the 
Form  of  Concord  we  find  these  w^ords :  "This  article 
concerning  Justification  by  Faith  (as  the  Apology  says) 
is  the  chief  in  the  entire  Christian  doctrine,  without 
which  no  poor  conscience  has  any  firm  consolation,  or 
can  know  aright  the  riches  of  the  grace  of  Christ  as  Dr. 
Luther  has  written:  *If  only  this  article  remain  in  view 
pure,  the  Christian  Church  also  remains  pure,  and  is 
harmonious  and  without  all  sects ;  but  if  it  do  not  remain 
pure,  it  is  not  possible  to  resist  any  error  or  any  fanatical 
spirit.'"  (Book  of  Concord,  p.  571.)  If  we  should  read 
the  whole  Augsburg  Confession  even  in  a  cursory  way, 
we  should  be  impressed  with  the  fact  that  the  leading 
principle  in  every  direction  was  to  reform  whatever 
tended  to  obscure  the  precious  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith. 

2.  Where  in  the  Confessions  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
do  v^^e  find  something  more  on  this  important  article? 

Our  fourth  article  is  very  brief,  and  since  every 
phrase  contains  something  fundamental  the  student  will 
gladly  avail  himself  of  additional  references.  As  has 
been  mentioned  it  is  a  good  plan  to  study  in  connection 
with  this  article  the  articles  VI  and  XX.     The  Apology 


The^  Augsburg  Confession.  8i 

also  has  lengthy  expositions  on  this  subject.  The  second 
chapter  of  the  Apology,  pp.  84-103  in  the  Book  of  Con- 
cord, deals  with  Justification,  while  the  third,  pp.  104- 
161,  treats  of  'Xove  and  the  fulfilling  of  the  Law,"  thus 
offering  an  exposition  of  Article  VI  of  our  Confession. 
It  is  profitable  to  study  these  parts  together.  Special 
care  should  be  used  to  observe  the  relation  between 
justification  and  sanctification.  The  confounding  of  these 
two  doctrines  was  the  fundamental  error  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  But  there  are  many  non-Catholics  who 
fall  into  the  same  mistake.  The  Form  of  Concord  also 
has  some  valuable  contributions  on  this  subject.  Read 
especially  Article  III  on  "the  Righteousness  of  Faith 
before  God"  and  Article  IV  "Of  Good  Works."  Even 
the  following  articles  V  '*of  Law  and  Gospel"  and  VI 
on  "The  Third  use  of  the  Law"  can  be  studied  with 
profit  in  this  connection.  Using  the  Form  of  Concord 
it  is  well  to  remember  that  this  Confession  always  treats 
of  the  same  subject  in  two  parts:  first  briefly  in  the 
"Epitome"  and  then  more  in  length  in  a  "Comprehensive 
Summary." 

3.  Hov;^  may  this  article  be  divided  for  a  profitable 
discussion? 

I.     Renunciation  oe  the  Error. 

Text:  "Also  they  (the  Lutheran  Churches)  teach  that 
men  cannot  be  justified  before  God  by  their  own  strength, 
merits  or  works." 

I.  The  history  of  this  error: 

a.  In  the  early  Church,  soon  after  the  death  of  the 
Apostles,  Paul's  doctrine  of  free  grace  dropped  into  the 
background,  and  a  doctrine  of  law  and  works  prevailed. 
(See  Kurtz,  Church  History,  §30,  2.) 

b.  Augustine  agreed  with  Lutheranism  when  he  said, 
that  in  fallen  man  there  are  no  powers  left  to  bring 
about  his  spiritual  renewal  and  that  all  must  be  expected 
from  divine  grace ;  but  he  was  a  Roman  Catholic  in  his 
conception  of  justification  as  a  gradual  growth  in  right- 


82  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

eousness.  He  confounded  justification  and  sanctification 
by  saying  that  God  justified  man  not  only  by  forgiving 
his  sins,  but  by  more  and  more  infusing  the  divine  right- 
eousness into  his  Hfe.  He  failed  to  take  justification  as 
a  declarative  act.    Thus,  this  error  originated. 

c.  The  teachers  of  the  middle  ages  (Thomas  Aquinas, 
Duns  Scotus,  Gabriel  Biel  and  others)  developed  this 
teaching  into  the  form,  in  which  it  became  the  accepted 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  at  the  Council 
of  Trent. 

2.  Why  were  our  Reformers  so  outspoken  in  re- 
jecting this  doctrine? 

a.  The  Scriptures  teach  us  to  exclude  the  merits  of 
man  from  that  by  which  he  is  actually  saved.  Eph.  2 : 
8-9 ;   Rom.  3  :  24 ;   Rom.  3  :  24. 

b.  It  leaves  the  sinner  in  uncertainty  as  to  his  salva- 
tion. Augustine  taught  consistently  that  man  could  never 
be  absolutely  sure  of  his  salvation. 

c.  It  was  the  fruitful  source  of  many  errors:  work- 
righteousness  in  all  its  forms  (monastic  seclusion,  pil- 
grimages, penances,  the  belief  that  man  may  even  do 
something  in  excess  of  what  God  has  the  right  to  demand 
of  him  and  thus  merit  special  grace,  a  grace  which  is 
stored  up  in  a  treasure  of  "superabundant  works"  and 
applied  for  the  benefit  of  others). 

II.     Statement  oe  the  True  Doctrine. 

1.  The  source  of  justification,  or  the  efficient  cause. 
Text :  "freely  justified."    Rom.  3  :  24;  Rom.  5 :  15. 

2.  The  ground  of  justification,  or  the  meritorious 
cause.  Text :  "for  Christ's  sake,"  and  "who,  by  His 
death,  has  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins."  An  espe- 
cially striking  passage  of  Scripture  is  Rom.  3 :  24-25. 

3.  The  true  meaning  of  justification :  It  is  not  making 
a  man  righteous,  as  the  Roman  Church  takes  it,  by  infus- 
ing sanctifying  grace  into  his  life.  Then  we  would  have 
no  peace  of  our  soul  as  we  would  always  have  to  ask 
whether  the  process  of  sanctification  has  advanced  suffi- 


Tnii  Augsburg  Confession.  83 

ciently.  No,  justification  is  an  act  of  God,  by  which  the 
sinner  is  declared  to  be  justified  for  Christ's  sake.  God 
regards  the  sinner  just  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  he 
is  actually  sinful.  Our  article  refers  to  the  entire  argu- 
ment of  the  third  and  fourth  chapters  of  Paul  to  the 
Romans.  A  negative  and  positive  side  are  to  be  dis- 
tinguished : 

a.  Negative:  A  non-imputation,  or  forgiveness  of 
sins.      Text:     "That   their   sins    are    forgiven."      Rom. 

4:7-8. 

b.  Positive:  The  act  of  justification.  The  act  of  par- 
don and  forgiveness  takes  from  the  sinner  what  he  has, 
but  justification  gives  him  what  he  has  not :  the  right- 
eousness of  Christ.  But  how  does  the  act  of  justification 
take  place?  The  text  of  our  article  says:  "This  faith 
God  imputes  for  righteousness  in  His  sight."  Sometimes 
it  is  the  "righteousness  of  Christ"  and  at  other  times  it  is 
our  "faith"  that  is  said  to  be  imputed  to  us.  But  that 
involves  no  contradiction.  For  "faith"  is  here  meant 
only  as  apprehending  "the  righteousness  of  Christ."  The 
Scripture  basis  is  Rom.  6 :  3-6.  The  emphasis  is  upon 
the  idea  of  imputation.  If  we  believe  on  Christ  then  His 
righteousness  is  imputed  to  us.  The  Roman  Catholic 
Church  and  those  of  similar  position  cannot  appreciate 
such  an  "imputed"  righteousness.  Adam  Moehler,  a 
Romanist,  says :  "The  Protestant  theory  of  justification 
expects  of  God  to  regard  an  Ethiopian  as  white."  But 
this  is  not  the  case,  for  in  our  doctrine  of  justification 
we  do  not  consider  the  sinner  as  he  is  in  himself,  but  we 
consider  him  in  his  relation  to  and  in  his  union  with 
Christ. 

4.  Faith  as  the  instrumental  or  apprehending  cause 
of  justification  on  man's  part.    Text :   "Through  faith." 

a.  What  kind  of  faith  is  meant?  Article  XX  of  our 
Confession  was  written  to  supplement  Article  IV,  and 
here  we  find  beautiful  thoughts  with  which  to  answer  this 
question.  "Faith  does  not  only  signify  a  knowledge  of 
the  history,  which  may  be  in  the  wicked  and  in  the  devil," 
though  such  knowledge  is  the  basis  of  faith.     No,  justi- 


84  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

fying  faith  must  be  ''a  faith  which  beheveth  the  article 
of  the  remission  of  sins,  namely,  that  by  Christ  we 
have  grace,  righteousness  and  remission  of  sins."  It 
means  "a  trust,  which  doth  comfort  and  lift  up  dis- 
quieted minds."  Even  our  brief  Article  IV  offers  a 
fitting  description  of  what  justifying  faith  is:  'Svhen 
we  believe  that  we  are  received  into  favor  and  that  their 
sins  are  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake."  Such  faith  is  a 
living  and  a  transforming  one.  That  is  the  leading 
thought  in  the  last  part  of  Article  XX.  The  Apology 
says:  '*We  speak  of  faith  as  being  not  an  ideal  fancy, 
but  a  new  light,  life  and  power  in  the  heart,  that  renews 
the  heart  and  disposition,  transforms  man  into  a  new 
creature."    See  also  Form  of  Concord,  p.  573  (19-20). 

b.  But  while  this  belongs  to  the  nature  of  faith,  it  is 
not  the  sanctifying  character  of  faith  that  justifies  us. 
We  must  guard  against  making  faith  a  meritorious  work. 
Our  article  simply  says :  "through  faith,"  not :  for  the 
sake  of  faith.  We  must  never  forget  these  words  of 
our  article:  ''freely  justified  for  Christ's  sake  through 
faith"   (propter  Christum,  per  fidem). 

We  are  now  prepared  to  see  how  this  article  is  the 
central  article  of  all  the  rest  of  the  Confession,  even  of 
the  second  part,  which  treats  of  the  abuses.* 

ARTICLE  FIVE. 

On  the  Origin  and  the  Causes  oe  Faith. 

(Of  the  Office  of  the  Ministry.) 

That  we  may  obtain  this  faith,  the  Office  of  teaching  the 
Gospel  and  administering  the  Sacraments  was  instituted.  For 
through  the  Word  and  Sacraments  as  through  instruments,  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  given,  who  worketh  faith  where  and  when  it 
pleaseth  God  in  them  that  hear  the  Gospel,  to  wit,  that  God, 
not  for  our  own  merits,  but  for  Christ's  sake,  justified  those 
who  believe  that  they  are  received  into  favor  for  Christ's  sake. 


*The  chief  opponents  to  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  justification  as  a 
judicial  act  on  the  part  of  God  are  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  the  Greek 
Catholic  Church,  the  Quakers,  the  Unitarians,  the  Universalists.  The 
Reformed  churches  are  here  in  agreement  with  the  Lutheran  Church. 
Only  they  do  not  give  to  this  doctrine  the  central  place  which  it  holds 
in  the  Lutheran  Church. 


Thk  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  85 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists  and  others,  who  think  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  cometh  to  men  without  the  external  Word,  through 
their  own  preparations  and  works. 

1.  What  is  the  leading  theme  of  this  article? 

Remember  that  in  the  preceding  article  faith  was  men- 
tioned as  the  instrumental  or  the  apprehending  cause  of 
salvation.  Now  the  question  comes :  How  is  this  justi- 
fying faith  obtained  ?  The  answer  is :  Faith  is  wrought 
in  us  through  the  means  of  grace.  The  custom  has  been 
to  write  over  this  article  as  superscription :  "Of  the 
Office  of  the  Ministry."  But  the  ministry  is  here  spoken 
of  only  in  an  incidental  way,  namely,  as  the  office  which 
is  charged  with  administering  the  means  of  grace.  The 
ministry  is  specifically  treated  in  Article  XIV.  If  we 
read  thoughtfully  the  beginning  of  Article  V  we  cannot 
help  but  receiving  the  impression  that  Melanchthon  here 
wants  to  teach  us  how  faith  is  obtained.  The  super- 
scriptions over  the  articles  of  our  Confession  have  been 
added  at  a  later  time. 

2.  How  is  justifying  faith  obtained? 

a.  It  is  wrought  in  us  through  the  Holy  Ghost  ("the 
Holy  Ghost  is  given,  who  worketh  faith").  Compare 
with  this  the  phrase  in  Article  XVIII:  "but  this  right- 
eousness is  wrought  in  the  heart  when  the  Holy  Ghost 
is  received  through  the  word."  This  is  in  agreement 
with  Luther's  explanation  of  the  Third  Article  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed :  "I  believe  that  I  cannot  by  my  own 
reason  and  strength  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  my  Lord,  or 
come  to  Him,  but  the  Holy  Ghost  has  called  me,  etc." 
We  can  resist  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  we  cannot  do  His 
work.  We  must  "hear  the  Gospel"  and  we  must  respond 
to  the  preaching  of  the  Word,  but  every  bit  of  the  new 
life  that  comes  into  us  is  a  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

b.  Even  occasion  and  time  of  such  working  of  faith 
in  us  is  in  the  hand  of  God :  "Who  worketh  faith  where 
and  when  it  pleaseth  God  in  them  that  hear  the  Gospel." 
Does  this  sound  arbitrary?  Suppose  God  should  work 
faith  in  one  individual  later  than  in  another  and  should 
let  him  struggle  longer  than  another  before  full  confi- 


86  The:  Augsburg  Coni?e;ssion. 

dence  in  the  Saviour  brings  him  the  peace  of  his  soul, 
who  knows  whether  this  will  not  in  the  end  mean  a 
deeper  and  a  better  founded  and  humbler  Christian? 
Some  obtain  faith  in  consequence  of  an  early  Christian 
training,  others  after  first  having  lost  themselves  in  the 
world,  some  late  in  life.  God  in  His  providence  chooses 
time  and  place  with  the  best  interests  of  our  soul  in  view. 

3.  Through  what  instruments  does  the  Holy  Ghost 
work  faith  in  us? 

a.  ''Through  the  Word  and  Sacraments  as  through 
instruments."  These  are  the  divinely  appointed  means 
of  grace.  By  the  Word  we  understand  the  Law  and  the 
Gospel.  Much  depends  upon  using  these  in  their  proper 
relation  to  each  other.  Read  in  the  Form  of  Concord 
Articles  V  and  VI.  The  Sacraments  are  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper.  Why  do  we  admit  these  only  to  be 
Sacraments?  A  Sacrament  must  have  all  of  the  follow- 
ing three  marks:  (i)  the  institution  by  Jesus  Christ 
Himself;  (2)  the  visible  sign;  (3)  the  communication 
of  a  heavenly  gift.  Read  the  fourth  and  fifth  parts  of 
Luther's  Small  Catechism,  and  the  same  parts  in  his 
Larger  Catechism. 

b.  A  special  ''office  of  teaching  the  Gospel  and  admin- 
istering the  Sacraments"  has  been  instituted.  It  is  an 
''ofiice"  of  serv'ice,  not,  as  in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church, 
an  order  of  propagating  itself  and  with  the  right  to  rule 
the  Church. 

4.  What  errorists  are  here  rejected? 

''They  condemn  the  Anabaptists  and  others,  who  think 
the  Holy  Ghost  cometh  to  men  without  the  external 
Word,  through  their  own  preparations  and  works." 

a.  The  Anabaptists  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation 
despised  the  "external  Word,"  i.  e.,  the  written  word  of 
the  Scriptures.  Their  emphasis  was  upon  the  Spirit,  by 
which  they  understood  an  inner  light  in  those  w^ho  had 
received  the  Holy  Spirit,  manifesting  itself  in  inspira- 
tions and  revelations. 

b.  There  were  ''others"  at  that  time  who  took  an 


Thi$  Augsburg  Confession.  87 

equal  position.  Among  them  was  Carlstadt,  Zwingli, 
Schwenkfeld.  A  leading  thought  in  the  Reformed 
Church  from  the  beginning  was  this,  that  the  divine 
influences  upon  men  are  experienced  in  an  immediate 
way.  Created  things  (like  words  of  the  Bible  and  the 
elements  of  the  Sacraments)  are  not  believed  to  be  used 
by  God  as  necessary  instruments  and  vehicles  of  His 
gracious  influence  upon  man,  but  the  Holy  Spirit  is  be- 
lieved to  work  immediately.  The  last  consequences  of 
this  spiritualism  have  been  drawn  by  the  Quakers,  a 
denomination  which  in  this  respect  must  be  regarded  as 
a  legitimate  daughter  of  the  Reformed  Church. 

c.  "Through  their  ozvn  preparations  and  zvorks."  All 
who  are  laboring  to  work  themselves  into  a  state  of 
spiritual  exaltation  by  anything  that  is  calculated  to  excite 
the  feelings  fall  under  the  sentence  of  this  article. 
Examples :  exciting  prayer  meetings  through  which 
sentiment  is  worked  up  during  evangelistic  campaigns; 
mannerism  in  preachers,  mostly  evangelists,  through 
which  they  try  to  bring  their  hearers  under  the  spell  of 
their  personality ;  the  employment  of  drastic  language  in 
revival  meetings.  At  the  basis  of  it  all  lies  a  despising 
of  the  God-appointed  means  of  grace. 

ARTICLE  SIX. 
O]?  the:  Ne:w  Obkdienci:. 

Also  the}^  teach,  that  this  faith  is  bound  to  bring  forth  good 
fruit  and  that  it  is  necessary  to  do  good  works  commanded  by 
God,  because  of  God's  will,  but  not  that  we  should  rely  on  those 
works  to  merit  justification  before  God.  For  remission  of  sins 
and  justification  are  apprehended  by  faith,  as  also  the  voice  of 
Christ  attests :  "When  ye  shall  have  done  all  these  things,  say : 
We  are  unprofitable  servants"  (Luke  17:  10).  The  same_  is  also 
taught  by  the  leathers.  For  Ambrose  says:  "It  is  ordained  of 
God  that  he  who  believes  in  Christ,  is  saved;  freely  receiving 
remission  of  sins,  without  works,  by  faith  alone." 

I.  What  kind  of  faith  will  alw^ays  be  the  source  of 
good  works? 

Our  article  answers :  ''this  faith."  The  faith,  namely, 
that  was  described  in  Article  IV  as  the  confidence  "that 


88  The  Augsburg  Confe:ssion. 

they  are  received  into  favor,  and  that  their  sins  are  for- 
given for  Christ's  sake."  The  faith  which,  according  to 
Article  V,  has  been  wrought  by  the  Holy  Ghost  through 
Word  and  Sacrament. 

2.  How  does  our  article  describe  the  nature  of  this 
faith  with  reference  to  the  production  of  good  works? 

**That  this  faith  is  bound  to  bring  forth  good  fruits, 
and  that  it  is  necessary  to  do  good  works."  Note  in  the 
German  text  the  words  *'soH"  and  ''muesse,"  in  the  Latin 
''debeat"  and  ''oporteat."  Faith  cannot  co-exist  with  a 
purpose  to  sin,  and  a  true  believer  cannot  live  in  sin. 
The  person  with  a  living  faith  is  under  an  inner  neces- 
sity to  do  good  works.  Luther  says :  ''Faith  is  a  divine 
work  in  us.  It  changes  us  and  regenerates  us.  It  morti- 
fies the  natural  man  in  us  and  makes  us  new  men  in  heart, 
spirit,  mind  and  all  powers,  and  it  cannot  be  without  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Oh,  it  is  a  living,  busy  and  powerful  thing 
about  faith.  It  is  impossible  that  it  should  not  always 
do  good  works.  It  does  not  stop  and  ask  where  good 
works  can  be  done,  but  before  there  can  be  any  asking, 
it  does  good  works  and  is  always  doing  them."  Such 
inner  necessity  for  doing  good  works  (read  Form  of 
Concord,  Article  IV,  6,  p.  505)  is  fundamentally  different 
from  being  driven  by  an  outward  compulsion  of  the  law, 
which  can  result  only  in  works  that  have  the  appearance 
of  being  good,  but  which  in  reality  have  no  value  in  the 
sight  of  God.  Article  VI  in  the  Form  of  Concord  con- 
tains valuable  statements  on  the  distinction  between 
works  of  the  law  and  works  of  the  Spirit. 

3.  What    kind    of    works    will    faith    bring    forth? 

"Good  works  commanded  by  God."  This  remark  is 
directed  against  the  self-chosen  works  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  The  Romanists  had  developed  the 
theory  of  the  so-called  "evangelical  counsels."  An 
opportunity  should  be  given  to  do  more  good  works  than 
God  has  commanded.  It  was  taught  that  the  doing  of 
such  works  would  bring  special  credits,  and  that  such 
credits  of  all  good  men  accumulated  were  constituting 


The  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  89 

a  treasury  of  superabundant  good  works,  a  credit  over 
which  the  Church  was  manager  and  could  help  others  in 
purgatory  who  had  a  shortage  of  credits.  There  were 
especially  three  good  works  which  were  regarded  as  not 
demanded  by  God  and  for  this  reason  considered  to  be 
highly  meritorious:  (i)  not  to  marry,  (2)  to  remain 
poor,  and  (3)  to  live  a  life  of  absolute  obedience  to  the 
Church.  These  are  the  vows  of  Monasticism,  never 
appreciated  by  the  Lutheran  Church,  because  they  repre- 
sented a  self-chosen  sanctity,  with  no  foundation  in  the 
Scriptures.  The  Lutherans  took  the  position  that  any- 
thing which  love,  growing  out  of  faith,  compels  us  to  do 
is  simply  our  Christian  duty  and  in  no  way  optional. 
They  regarded  those  aforementioned  works  as  useless. 
Matthew  15:9  we  read:  "But  in  vain  they  do  worship 
me,  teaching  for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men." 
The  Scriptures,  containing  the  commandments  of  God, 
are  the  guide,  enabling  us  to  determine  which  are  good 
works,  and  which  are  not. 

4.  What  shall  be  the  motive? 

On  this  we  have  a  double  statement,  first  a  positive 
and  then  a  negative. 

Positive:  "because  of  God's  will."  In  the  Apology 
three  reasons  are  mentioned  why  a  believer  should  do 
good  works:  (i)  out  of  gratitude  to  God;  (2)  for  the 
exercise  and  development  of  faith;  (3)  as  a  testimony 
before  the  world. 

b.  Negative:  "but  not  that  we  should  rely  on  those 
works  to  merit  justification  before  God."  This  article 
stands  for  a  careful  distinction  between  justification  and 
sanctification.  Many  sincere  Christians  deceive  them- 
selves by  reasoning  in  the  following  way :  Since  '4t  is 
necessary  to  do  good  works,"  it  must  be  concluded  that 
they  belong  to  the  ground  of  salvation.  But  as  soon  as 
this  is  admitted  our  salvation  is  uncertain,  because  we 
can  never  do  all  we  should  and  will  always  have  to  stand 
under  the  words  of  Christ :  "When  ye  shall  have  done  all 
these  things,  say:  We  are  unprofitable  servants"  (Luke 
17 :  10).    Guided  by  this  consideration,  the  Form  of  Con- 


90  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

cord  (see  p.  504),  rejected  the  statements  of  George 
Major:  ''Good  works  are  necessary  for  salvation,"  "it 
is  impossible  to  be  saved  without  good  works,"  "no  one 
has  ever  been  saved  without  good  works."  The  ground 
of  our  salvation,  as  we  saw  in  Article  IV,  is  Jesus  Christ 
"who,  by  His  death,  hath  made  satisfaction  for  our  sins" ; 
and  our  assurance  of  salvation  is  God's  act  of  freely  jus- 
tifying us  for  Christ's  sake,  through  faith  when  we  be- 
lieve that  we  are  received  into  favor  and  that  our  sins 
are  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake.  In  Eph.  2 :  8  and  9  we 
read :  "By  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith ;  and  that  not 
of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God;  not  of  works,  lest 
any  man  should  boast."  The  opponent  of  George  Major 
(Nic.  Amsdorf)  went  so  far  as  to  say:  "Good  works  are 
injurious  to  salvation."  This  the  Form  of  Concord  also 
rejects.  Good  works  will  become  injurious  if  "we  rely 
upon  those  works  to  merit  justification  before  God,"  as 
our  article  says,  but  the  fact  remains  that  faith  is  "bound 
to  bring  forth  good  fruits  and  that  it  is  necessary  to  do 
good  works." 

Article  XX  of  our  Confession  was  added  to  elucidate 
this  article  as  well  as  Article  IV. 

ARTICLE  SEVEN. 

Oi^  THK  Church. 

Also  they  teach  that  One  holy  Church  is  to  continue  forever. 
The  Church  is  the  congregation  of  saints,  in  which  the  Gospel  is 
rightly  taught  and  the  Sacraments  rightly  administered.  And 
to  the  true  unity  of  the  Church,  it  is  enough  to  agree  concern- 
ing the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  and  the  administration  of  the 
Sacraments.  Nor  is  it  necessary  that  human  traditions,  rites, 
or  ceremonies,  instituted  by  men,  should  be  everywhere  alike. 
As  Paul  says :  "One  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of 
all,"  etc.     (Eph.  4:5,  6). 

I.  What  is  the  Church? 

a.  It  is  not,  as  the  Catholics  teach,  an  external 
organization  under  the  Pope  of  Rome  and  his  bishops 
and  priests.  If  that  were  the  Church  then  Luther  and  his 
followers  certainly  were  outside  of  it,  because  they  were 
excommunicated. 


The:  Augsburg  Coni^kssion.  91 

b.  "The  church  is  the  congregation  of  saints."  Wher- 
ever there  are  souls  who  have  been  regenerated  through 
the  Holy  Spirit  and  believe  in  Christ  as  their  Saviour, 
there  the  Christian  Church  is,  and  these  souls  are  mem- 
bers of  it,  forming  part  of  the  "One  holy  Church,"  no 
matter  how  far  apart  they  may  live  and  by  what  denomi- 
national name  they  may  be  known. 

c.  Yet  while  our  Confession  could  not  consent  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  conception  of  the  Church  as  one  certain 
circumscribed  outward  organization,  neither  could  it 
agree  with  the  Anabaptists  who  believed  in  no  congrega- 
tion of  the  saints,  but  just  in  individual  saints,  with  no 
obligation  whatever  to  assemble.  Against  this  view 
Melanchthon  writes  in  the  Apology:  The  Church  is  not 
a  Platonic  state,  but  it  has  a  real  existence.  Therefore 
he  calls  it  in  our  article  "the  congregation  of  saints,  in 
which  the  Gospel  is  rightly  taught  and  the  Sacraments 
rightly  administered." 

2.  Have  the  Lutherans  not  destroyed  the  unity  of 
the  Church? 

At  the  beginning  of  this  article  it  is  admitted  "that 
one  holy  church  is  to  continue  forever."  But  by  reject- 
ing the  traditions,  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  the  Lutherans  seem  to  have  destroyed 
this  unity  of  the  Church.  To  this  grave  charge  an 
answer  had  to  be  made  in  this  article.  We  find  it  in  the 
following  words :  "And  to  the  true  unity  of  the  Church, 
it  is  enough  to  agree  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  Gos- 
pel and  the  administration  of  the  Sacram^ents."  This  is 
the  positive  part  of  the  answer.  A  very  important  state- 
ment :  Where  there  is  agreement  in  the  teaching  of  the 
Gospel  and  in  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments  there 
is  unity,  but  only  there.  Then  follows  the  negative: 
statement :  "Nor  is  it  necessary  that  human  traditions, 
rites  and  ceremonies,  instituted  by  men,  should  be  every- 
where alike."  These  words  are  also  important.  Such 
traditions,  rites  and  ceremonies  are  not  here  uncondition- 
ally rejected.  Some,  of  course,  must  be  rejected,  as  will 
be  seen  in  i\rticle  XV,  namely,  such  as  have  been  "insti- 


92  The  Augsburg  Con^e:ssion. 

tuted  to  propitiate  God,  to  merit  grace  and  to  make  satis- 
faction for  sins" ;  but  not  those  "which  may  be  observed 
without  sin,  and  which  are  profitable  unto  tranquilhty  and 
good  order  in  the  Church."  Yet  while  some  of  these 
''human  traditions,  rites  and  ceremonies,  instituted  by 
men,"  may  be  right  and  even  helpful,  we  are  not  war- 
ranted in  making  the  observance  of  them  essential  to 
unity  in  the  Church. 

3.  How  are  we  to  judge  of  the  various  denomina- 
tions as  to  the  question  where  the  true  Church  of 
Christ  is  to  be  found? 

The  true  Church  is  found  where  "the  Gospel  is  rightly 
taught  and  the  Sacraments  rightly  administered."  Can 
this  be  said  of  the  Lutheran  Church?  To  answer  this 
question  correctly  we  have  to  divide  it  into  two  ques- 
tions:  (i)  Can  we  say  of  the  Lutheran  Church  as  repre- 
sented by  her  Confessions  that  she  is  pure  in  her  teaching 
of  Word  and  Sacraments?  Every  one  who  is  a  Lutheran 
of  conviction,  having  examined  the  Confessions  in  the 
light  of  the  Scriptures,  will  affirm  this.  And  it  seems 
to  us  that  others  also,  if  they  could  just  rid  themselves 
of  prejudices,  would,  after  a  candid  examination,  reach 
the  same  conclusion.  The  Scripturalness  of  the  Lutheran 
Confessions  will  captivate  him  who  gives  himself  to  a 
thorough  study  of  them.  But  (2)  Can  we  claim  of  the 
Lutheran  churches  everyufhere  that  they  actually  do  teach 
the  Gospel  rightly  and  that  their  administration  of  the 
Sacraments  rests  upon  the  Scriptural  conceptions?  This 
is  an  altogether  different  question.  The  Lutheran  name 
does  not  always  guarantee  a  teaching  after  the  Lutheran 
Confessions.  There  are  Lutherans  who  find  themselves 
in  disagreement  with  the  doctrine  of  man's  total  deprav- 
ity as  taught  in  Article  H,  who  teach  a  Christ  that  can 
be  no  Saviour  (against  x\rticle  III),  who  in  their  concep- 
tions of  justification  and  sanctification  (Articles  IV  and 
VI)  are  moving  on  Roman  Catholic  ground,  who  ignore 
the  appointed  means  of  grace  and  expect  to  draw  the  Holy 
Spirit  by  all  kinds  of  human  eft"orts  (against  Article  V), 
who  can  never  learn  the  meaning  of  Holy  Baptism  for 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  93 

the  life  of  the  Christian  and  to  whom  the  Sacraments 
are  nothing  but  symbols  (against  Articles  II,  IX  and  X). 
Occasionally  we  find  more  Scriptural  conceptions  in 
other  churches  than  in  Lutheran  churches.  So  in  answer- 
ing this  question  we  can  only  say :  Lutheran  churches 
are  representatives  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ  only  in 
so  far  as  they  actually  live  up  to  their  Confessions  in 
teaching  and  practice. 

This  has  paved  the  way  for  a  brief  discussion  of  how 
we  should  regard  the  other  denominations.  Can  we  say 
of  the  other  churches  that  they  are  true  churches  of 
Christ  in  the  sense  of  our  article?  Here  also  we  must 
be  guarded  by  the  words :  ''The  Church  is  the  congrega- 
tion of  saints,  in  which  the  Gospel  is  rightly  taught  and 
the  Sacraments  rightly  administered."  Do  not  say  that 
this  word  "rightly"  may  not  have  been  so  seriously  meant, 
so  that  we  would  be  justified  to  treat  it  as  a  mere  slip 
of  Melanchthon's  pen.  We  know  that  it  was  not  in 
the  first  drafts  of  the  Confession,  as  can  be  seen  in 
the  manuscript  which  was  found  in  the  Nuremberg 
archive,  a  few  years  ago,  but  it  was  put  in  before 
the  Confession  was  finished,  which  shows  that  it  is 
there  for  a  purpose.  Can  we  as  Lutherans  admit  that 
in  the  other  churches  "the  Gospel  is  rightly  taught  and 
the  Sacraments  rightly  administered"?  If  we  believe 
that  our  Confessions  are  Scriptural  then  we  must  regard 
the  teaching  of  the  other  churches  as  unscriptural  in  the 
points  where  they  reject  the  teaching  of  our  Confessions. 
Yes  and  No  cannot  dwell  together  in  one  conviction. 

But  can  ive  not  say  that  the  differences  consist  only 
in  the  viezvpoints  taken,  so  that  both  sides  have  the  Gos- 
pel from  a  different  point  of  view?  It  is  true,  for  in- 
stance, that  the  Calvinists  have  with  us  the  doctrine  of 
justification.  But  they  have  it  from  peculiar  view- 
point, the  sovereignty  of  God.  This  does  not  do  away 
with  the  Gospel,  yet  the  Gospel  of  free  grace  becomes 
beclouded.  Under  Calvinistic  preaching,  God  appears  to 
us  more  as  a  stern  Lord  than  as  a  loving  Father.  We 
are  more  His  obeying  servants  than  His  confiding  chil- 
dren.     A    wrong    viewpoint    can    seriously    affect    the 


94  'The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

teaching  of  the  Gospel.  But  now  take  another  doctrine, 
for  instance,  the  Lord's  Supper.  Here  the  difference 
is  not  in  viewpoints,  but  the  one  side  positively  rejects 
what  the  other  side  accepts.  The  difference  between 
Lutherans  and  Baptists  on  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  is 
another  case.  The  difference  is  a  radical  one :  what 
the  Lutherans  regard  as  a  real  means  of  grace  and  the 
source  of  the  new  religious  life,  this  is  to  the  Baptists 
a  mere  act  of  obedience  on  the  part  of  the  converted. 
In  these,  as  in  many  other  cases,  it  is  not  a  mere  differ- 
ence in  viewpoints,  but  a  question  of  Yes  and  No.  A 
Lutheran  who  believes  that  the  Confessions  of  his 
Church  are  Scriptural  cannot  include  the  opposing 
denominations  as  such  in  the  Church  ''in  which  the  Gospel 
is  rightly  taught  and  the  Sacraments  rightly  admin- 
istered." 

And  yet,  w^e  would  not  want  to  deny  that  the  Church 
of  Christ  has  its  existence  also  among  the  other  denomi- 
nations. Thank  God  that  it  has.  Absolute  purity  of 
doctrine,  let  us  remember,  is  an  ideal  that  has  not  been 
reached  by  all  Lutherans  either.  The  Confessions  of  our 
Church  are  Scriptural,  but  to  what  extent  have  we  suc- 
ceeded in  embracing  their  truth  in  all  directions?  It  is 
the  goal  for  the  development  in  many  parts  of  the  Luth- 
eran Church.  On  the  other  hand,  many  of  the  churches 
which  by  name  are  opposing  Lutheranism  have  so  much 
of  Gospel  truth  left  in  the  systems  of  their  teaching  that 
souls  can  be  regenerated  to  a  life  with  Christ.  The 
unscriptural  principles  of  their  creeds  and  traditions 
frequently  do  not  work  themselves  out  in  the  convictions 
of  their  ministers  and  members.  The  Bible  with  much 
truly  Scriptural  literature  is  constantly  counteracting 
these  influences.  In  some  churches,  it  is  true,  the  errors 
overshadow  the  truth  in  a  most  deplorable  manner,  so 
that  it  is  hard  to  discover  even  som.e  remnants  of  the  one 
Holy  Church  of  which  our  article  speaks.  But  of  many 
churches  we  rejoice  to  admit  that  notwithstanding  some 
of  their  unscriptural  conceptions  of  doctrine  so  much  is 
preserved  of  the  means  of  grace  that  in  them  also  the 
Holy  Spirit  can  have  His  work  for  the  regeneration  of 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  95 

souls.  And  where  the  Holy  Spirit  can  operate  for  man's 
regeneration  there  must  be  a  representation  of  the  one 
holy  Church. 

ARTICLE  EIGHT. 

The  Ministry  or  Evie  Men  in  the  Church. 

What  the  Church  Is. 

Although  the  Church  properly  is  the  Congregation  of  Saints 
and  true  believers,  nevertheless,  since,  in  this  life,  many  hypo- 
crites and  evil  persons  are  mingled  therewith,  it  is  lawful  to  use 
the  Sacraments,  which  are  administered  by  evil  men ;  according 
to  the  saying  of  Christ :  "The  Scribes  and  the  Pharisees  sit  in 
Moses'  seat,"  etc.  (Matt.  23:2.)  Both  the  Sacraments  and  Word 
are  effectual  by  reason  of  the  institution  and  commandment  of 
Christ,  notwithstanding  they  be  administered  by  evil  men. 

They  condemn  the  Donatists,  and  such  Hke,  who  denied  it  to 
be  lawful  to  use  the  ministry  of  evil  men  in  the  Church,  and 
who  thought  the  ministry  of  evil  men  to  be  unprofitable  and  of 
none  effect. 

1.  What  is  the  main  object  of  this  article? 

This  article  does  not  intend  to  present  a  deliverance 
on  what  the  Church  is.  On  that  subject  we  heard  in  the 
preceding  article.  In  the  way  of  mere  repetition  or, 
perhaps,  for  the  purpose  of  emphasis  only  we  read  here : 
"that  the  Church  properly  is  the  congregation  of  saints 
and  true  believers."  It  is  rightly  remarked  by  Prof. 
Kolde  that  the  old  superscription  "What  the  Church  is  ?" 
is  not  well  chosen.  (The  superscriptions  over  the  articles 
of  the  Confession  have  been  added  at  a  later  time.)  The 
object  of  this  article  is  to  establish  an  important  principle 
with  reference  to  the  ministry  of  evil  men  in  the  Church. 

2.  Are  the  means  of  grace  effectual  when  adminis- 
tered by  unregenerated  persons? 

This  is  the  real  theme  of  this  article.  On  this  impor- 
tant question  the  Church  of  the  Reformation  had  to 
express  itself.  First  the  statement  is  made  that  "in  this 
life  many  hypocrites  and  evil  persons  are  mingled  with 
the  Church.  It  cannot  be  otherwise  in  this  life  where 
we  can  see  into  no  man's  heart  and  where  we  cannot  be 


96  The:  Augsburg  CoNi^E:ssioN. 

absolutely  sure  as  to  the  sincerity  of  his  profession.  But 
now,  if  this  is  a  fact  how  can  we  be  sure,  absolutely 
sure,  that  even  the  ministers  of  the  congregations  are 
always  godly  men?  They  are  of  flesh  and  blood  and 
tempted  to  sin  like  the  rest  of  humanity.  But  now  the 
serious  question  comes :  Are  the  ministerial  acts  of  un- 
godly men  valid?  How  with  the  preaching  of  the  Word 
of  such  men?  To  this  our  article  nswers :  ''It  is  lawful 
to  use  the  Sacraments,  which  are  administered  by  evil 
men  ;  according  to  the  saying  of  Christ :  The  Scribes  and 
the  Pharisees  sit  in  Moses'  seat,  etc.  (Matt.  23  :  2).  Both 
the  Sacraments  and  the  Word  are  effectual  by  reason  of 
the  institution  and  commandment  of  Christ,  notwith- 
standing they  be  administered  by  evil  men."  The  valid- 
ity lies  in  the  ''institution  and  commandment  of  Christ." 
If  a  man  is  regularly  called  into  the  ministry  (see  Article 
XIV)  then  we  must  believe  in  the  efficacy  of  the  means 
of  grace  administered  by  him. 

3.  Who  are  quoted  here  as  opponents  of  this  prin- 
ciple? 

"The  Donatists,  and  such  like." 

a.  The  Donatists,  a  strong  separatistic  sect  in  North 
Africa  about  the  fourth  century,  taught  that  holy  men 
only  should  be  tolerated  in  the  Church,  and  that  only 
such  priests  as  had  been  consecrated  by  holy  bishops  and 
were  blameless  in  their  lives  could  administer  the  Sacra- 
ments rightly,  and  that  the  ministerial  acts  of  unholy 
priests  had  no  effect. 

b.  ''And  such  like:'  Wiklef  was  not  sound  on  this 
point.  If  Luther  had  followed  him  here,  it  would  have 
meant  the  stamp  of  a  sect  upon  the  Church  which  he 
founded.  There  is  also  a  Donatistic  tendency  in 
Methodism. 

ARTICLE  NINE. 
On  Baptism. 

Of  baptism,  they  teach,  that  it  is  necessary  to  salvation,  and 
that  through  Baptism  is  offered  the  grace  of  God;  and  that 
children  are  to  be  baptized,  who,  being  offered  to  God  through 
Baptism,  are  received  into  His  grace. 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  97 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists,  who  allow  not  the  baptism  of 
children,  and  say  that  children  are  saved  without  Baptism. 

1.  Where  in  our  Confessions  do  we  find  a  more 
exhaustive  treatment  of  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism? 

In  the  Catechisms  of  Luther.  The  fourth  part  of 
Luther's  Small  Catechism  especially  must  be  carefully 
studied  by  him  who  wants  to  have  a  full  view  of  what 
our  Church  teaches  on  Baptism.  This  article  is  exceed- 
ingly brief.  We  know  from  the  draft  of  the  Confession 
which  a  few  years  ago  was  found  in  the  Nuremberg 
archive  that  at  first  the  intention  was  simply  to  insist 
on  infant  Baptism  against  the  Anabaptists.  The  ar- 
ticle was  changed  to  its  present  form  during  the  last 
days  before  the  delivery  of  the  Confession.  A  few 
doctrinal  statements  on  Baptism  in  general  were  inserted. 
We  must  keep  in  mind  that  the  Augsburg  Confession 
does  not  aim  at  a  complete  exhibition  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  young  church.  In  fact,  at  the  time  of  the  preparation 
of  the  Confessions,  Melanchthon  wrote  with  the  thought 
in  his  mind  that  the  Lutherans  were  to  remain  a  part  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  The  doctrines  which  the 
Lutherans  held  in  common  with  their  opponents  were  not 
dwelt  upon  much  except  when  there  was  a  special  reason 
to  do  so.  This  explains  the  brevity  of  this  article  as 
well  as  the  following  on  the  Sacrament. 

2.  Does  our  article  make  Baptism  a  real  means  of 
grace  ? 

Here  appears  a  point  of  division  between  the  Luth- 
erans and  all  other  denominations,  if  we  leave  the  peculiar 
position  of  the  Roman  and  the  Greek  Catholic  Churches 
out  of  consideration.  All  other  Protestant  denominations 
can  see  in  Baptism  no  means  of  creating  a  new  spiritual 
life.  To  them  Baptism  is  only  a  symbol  of  regeneration. 
It  does  not  work  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  but  it  is  merely 
an  illustration  of  how  God  will  wash  man's  sins  away. 
Some  also  speak  of  Baptism  as  a  seal  of  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  which  has  taken  place  independent  of  Baptism. 
To  all  these,  Baptism  is  no  real  means  of  grace,  no  means 
through  which  God  communicates  His  grace  to  the  soul. 


98  The:  Augsburg  Confi^ssion. 

Now  the  question  is :  Does  our  brief  article  offer  a 
testimony  on  this  question  ?  Indeed  it  does !  We  read 
that  "through  Baptism  is  offered  the  grace  of  God." 
Are  we  justified  in  taking  this  word  "offered"  in  the 
meaning  of  a  real  communication  of  grace?  What  does 
Luther's  Small  Catechism  answer  to  the  question :  What 
gifts  or  benefits  does  Baptism  confer?  He  says:  "It 
worketh  forgiveness  of  sins,  delivers  from  death  and  the 
devil,  and  confers  everlasting  salvation  on  all  who  believe 
as  the  Word  and  promise  of  God  declare."  I  ask  again : 
How  is  this  word  "offered"  to  be  taken  without  doing 
violence  to  the  text  of  our  article?  If  we  take  in  connec- 
tion with  it  the  closing  words  of  the  first  paragraph 
"who,  being  offered  to  God  through  Baptism,  are  received 
into  His  grace"  then  the  teaching  of  Article  IX  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  is  the  same  as  that  of  Luther's 
Catechism.  Perhaps  someone  will  say:  The  word 
"regeneration"  is  not  in  this  article.  But  how  did  we 
read  in  Article  II  on  Original  Sin?  There  we  read  that 
this  sin  was  "condemning  and  bringing  eternal  death 
upon  those  not  born  again  through  Baptism  and  the  Holy 
Ghost."  The  Scriptures  speak  of  Baptism  as  a  real 
means  of  grace  in  the  following  passages :  Acts  2 :  38 ; 
22 :  16;  John  3:5;  Tit.  3:5-7;  Eph.  5  :  25-27  ;  Mark  16. 

3.  What  suggestion  may  we  take  from  the  fact  that 
our  article  has  no  statement  on  the  mode  of  Baptism? 

In  the  question  whether  Baptism  should  be  adminis- 
tered by  sprinkling  or  by  immersion  our  Church  is  not 
interested.  It  cannot  be  proved  by  the  Scriptures  to  be 
an  essential  matter. 

4.  What  does  this  article  emphasize  against  the  Ana- 
baptists? 

That  children  also  are  to  be  baptized.  The  position 
of  the  Anabaptists  and  their  followers  "that  children  are 
saved  without  baptism"  is  rejected.  If  God  in  His  mercy 
will  make  exceptions  and  not  punish  children  because 
they  were  not  brought  to  Baptism  yet  we  have  no  right 
to  make  an  established  rule  of  such  gracious  exceptions 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  99 

and  keep  children  from  the  means  of  grace.  The  objec- 
tion that  children  should  not  be  baptized  because  they 
cannot  yet  understand  and  believe  rests  upon  a  miscon- 
ception. While  there  is  no  conscious  faith  in  a  child,  yet 
there  is  need  of  salvation.  It  must  come  into  contact 
with  Him  who  came  as  a  Saviour  into  this  world  and 
who  said:  ''Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me, 
and  forbid  them  not :  for  such  is  the  Kingdom  of  God." 
(Mark  10:  14.) 

5.  What  should  be  our  attitude  to  what  the  Germans 
call  "Nottaufe,"  a  Baptism  by  laymen  in  the  case  of 
extreme  necessity? 

If  Baptism  is  "necessary  to  salvation"  as  our  article 
says,  if  it  is  an  appointed  means  of  grace,  through  which 
we  are  ''born  again"  (Article  II)  and  through  which  we 
"are  received  into  His  grace,"  then  we  should  not  be 
deprived  of  this  Sacrament  in  the  hour  of  our  death, 
merely  because  an  ordained  minister  is  not  at  hand.  In 
such  case  a  layman,  even  a  woman,  may  administer  Bap- 
tism. This  has  always  been  customary  in  the  Lutheran 
Church.  The  following  passage  of  Scripture  has  been 
quoted  in  favor  of  this  practice :  "Then  Zipporah  took 
a  sharp  stone,  and  cut  off  the  foreskin  of  her  son"  (Ex. 
4:25).  Other  churches  are  not  favorable  to  such  prac- 
tice. But  to  them  there  is  no  real  necessity  for  Baptism, 
since  they  regard  it  as  a  mere  symbolic  rite.  To  us  it  is 
a  necessary  means  of  grace.  Therefore  the  order  of  the 
Church  in  respect  to  the  administration  of  the  Sacrament 
by  ordained  ministers  is  second  to  the  need. 

6.  But  is  Baptism  under  all  circumstances  "necessary 
for  salvation"? 

We  would  not  say  that,  as  was  already  stated  in  our 
interpretation  of  Article  II.  But  while  God  is  not  bound 
to  the  rule  and  can  find  other  ways,  we  have  no  right  to 
make  the  exceptions.  We  are  tied  to  the  rule,  and  God 
will  hold  us  responsible  when  we  treat  his  Sacrament 
with  indifference  or  contempt. 


100  Thk  Augsburg  Confession. 

ARTICLE  TEN. 
Of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Of  the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  they  teach,  that  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  are  truly  present,  and  are  distributed  to  those 
who  eat  in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord;  and  they  disapprove  of 
those  that  teach  otherwise. 

1.  Where  do  we  find  something  more  on  this  impor- 
tant subject? 

Above  all  read  the  fifth  part  of  Luther's  Small  Cate- 
chism. All  the  Confessions  treat  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
A  very  thorough  discussion  is  found  in  Article  VII  of 
the  Form  of  Concord.  Read  first  the  brief  summary 
(Epitome)  in  the  first  part,  and  then  the  more  extensive 
exposition  in  the  second  part. 

2.  What  is,  according  to  our  article,  the  Sacramental 
gift  in  the  Lord's  Supper? 

Not  bread  and  wine  only,  not  certain  spiritual  influ- 
ences from  the  exalted  Christ  exclusively,  but  "the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ."  This  is  the  clear  teaching  of  the 
words  of  institution.  The  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in 
the  glorified  condition  of  His  humanity  as  He  is  risen 
from  the  dead  and  has  ascended  to  heaven  and  is  now 
sitting  at  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father  with  the 
power  of  being  present  wherever  He  wills — the  Body 
and  Blood  of  this  Christ  is  the  Sacramental  gift  in  the 
Lord's  Supper.  As  Luther  says  in  his  Small  Catechism : 
''It  is  the  true  body  and  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
under  the  bread  and  wine,  given  unto  us  Christians  to 
eat  and  to  drink,  as  it  was  instituted  by  Christ  Himself." 
The  gift  here  is  something  different  from  what  we  receive 
in  other  religious  services.    Matt.  26 :  26-28. 

3.  For  what  purpose  do  we  receive  the  Sacramental 
gift  of  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Supper? 

Our  article  does  not  express  itself  on  this  question. 
But  Luther  does  in  the  Catechism.  Speaking  of  the  bene- 
fits derived  from  such  eating  and  drinking  he  says : 
''They  are  pointed  out  in  these  words:   'Given,  and  shed 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  ioi 

for  you,  for  the  remission  of  sins.'  Namely,  through 
these  words,  the  remission  of  sins,  Hfe  and  salvation 
are  granted  unto  us  in  the  Sacrament.  For  where  there 
is  remission  of  sins,  there  are  also  life  and  salvation." 
The  spiritual  gifts  communicated  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
are  ''the  remission  of  sins,  Hfe  and  salvation."  This 
must  be  received  through  faith  in  God's  promises.  But 
the  Body  and  the  Blood  are,  on  one  hand,  a  means  for 
communicating  these  spiritual  gifts.  This  is  apparent 
from  the  words :  "Given  and  shed  for  you."  They  are, 
on  the  other  hand,  a  pledge  and  a  seal  by  which  these 
spiritual  gifts  are  assured  to  us.  This  is  clear  from  the 
words:  "For  the  remission  of  sins."  (Larger  Cate- 
chism, pp.  478,  479.) 

4.  How  do  we  come  in  contact  with  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Supper? 

The  basis  for  our  answer  are  the  words  of  our  text: 
"The  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  truly  present  and  are 
distributed  to  those  who  eat  in  the  Supper  of  our  Lord." 
We  need  not  secure  Christ's  presence  by  drawing  Him 
down  from  heaven  through  our  faith  as  is  taught  by  Cal- 
vin. He  is  present  at  the  communion.  And  not  only 
according  to  His  divinity,  but  also  according  to  His 
humanity.  We  need  not  lift  ourselves  up  by  a  strong 
faith  to  the  right  hand  of  God  in  order  there  to  partici- 
pate in  Christ's  humanity  which,  according  to  Calvin,  is 
confined  to  a  certain  place  in  heaven ;  no,  Christ's 
humanity  has  been  glorified,  it  is  omnipresent  with  His 
divinity,  and,  therefore,  His  Body  and  Blood  "are  truly 
present"  in  the  Supper.  So  our  article  can  speak  of  a 
distribution  and  an  eating.  It  is  through  an  eating  and 
drinking  that  we  receive  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ 
in  the  communion. 

5.  Are  the  words  of  our  text  meant  in  the  sense  of 
Transubstantiation  ? 

By  transubstantiation  we  understand  the  changing  of 
bread  and  wine  into  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.  Our 
article  does   not  intend  to  teach  this   Roman   Catholic 


102  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

doctrine.  This  we  can  tell  by  referring  to  the  German 
text  of  our  article,  which  reads :  "It  is  taught  that  the 
true  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  truly  present  under 
the  form  of  bread  and  wine  in  the  Supper."  The  same 
language  we  find  in  Luther's  Small  Catechism :  "It  is 
the  true  Body  and  Blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  under 
the  bread  and  wine.''  This  shows  that  the  Lutheran 
Church  does  not  teach  transubstantiation.  But  does  she 
not  teach  consuhstantlation?  If  by  this  term  we  are  to 
understand  the  creation  of  a  third  substance  out  of  the 
two  substances  (bread  and  wine  on  the  one  hand,  Body 
and  Blood  on  the  other),  then  the  Lutheran  Church  also 
rejects  consubstantiation.  According  to  the  Confessions 
of  our  Church  the  earthly  elements  of  bread  and  wine 
remain  w^hat  they  are,  unchanged,  but  "in,  with  and 
under"  these  elements,  in  a  mysterious  way,  the  true 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are  received. 

6.  Who  are  meant  by  the  closing  words  of  our  arti- 
cle :  "and  they  (the  Lutheran  churches)  disapprove  of 
those  that  teach  otherwise"? 

a.  Of  course,  all  opponents  to  the  Lutheran  doctrine, 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  included.  Even  though  it 
may  be  true  that  Melanchthon,  at  this  critical  moment, 
was  anxious  to  say  as  little  as  possible  of  the  opposition 
of  the  Lutherans  to  the  Catholic  Church,  yet  the  theory 
of  transubstantiation  was  not  held  by  the  Lutherans. 
Luther  had  rejected  it  positively. 

b.  But  it  is  historically  sure  that  this  closing  sentence 
of  our  article  was  especially  intended  as  an  expression 
against  Zwingli  and  his  adherents.  We  know  that  from 
Melanchthon's  correspondence  at  that  time.  Philip  of 
Hessia  whose  sympathies  were  on  the  side  of  Zwingli 
was  opposed  to  this  phrase  of  rejection,  and  he  tried  his 
best  to  move  those  who  were  to  give  their  signatures  to 
the  Confession  to  strike  it  out.  He  wanted  to  make  it 
possible  for  Zwingli  with  his  symbolical  conception  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  to  come  in  under  this  article.  But 
neither  Melanchthon  nor  the  rest  of  the  Lutherans  as- 
sembled at  Augsburg  could  be  persuaded.     So  Philip  of 


The  Augsburg  Conl^kssion.  103 

Hessia  yielded.  Out  of  consideration  for  him  the 
milder  term  ''disapprove"  instead  of  "condemn"  (as 
in  Articles  I,  II,  V,  VIII,  IX,  XII,  XIII,  XVI, 
XVII,  XVIII)  was  used  at  this  place.  But  our  Lutheran 
fathers  at  Augsburg  felt  that  it  was  their  duty  not  only 
to  state  their  doctrine,  but  also  to  reject  the  teaching 
that  had  been  opposed  to  it  by  the  Swiss  reformer  and 
the  "Sacramentarians"  in  general.* 

7.  Is  it  right  for  the  Augsburg  Confession  to  reject 
the  teaching  of  the  Reformed  churches  regarding  the 
Lord's  Supper? 

a.  What  do  zve  understand  by  the  ''Reformed" 
churches,  and  hozv  do  they  teach  on  the  Lord's  Supper? 
By  the  Reformed  churches  we  understand,  in  the  first 
place,  the  Church  which  took  its  beginning  from  the 
work  of  Zwingli,  but  then  received  its  stamp  from  Calvin. 
It  is  the  Church  of  the  Heidelberg  Catechism.  This 
Church  was  at  an  early  time  transplanted  to  Holland,  to 
Scotland  and  to  England.  In  England  and  Scotland  it 
divided  on  the  question  of  church  government  and  estab- 
lished itself  under  the  names  of  the  Episcopal,  of  the 
Presbyterian  and  the  Congregational  churches,  with  con- 
fessions agreeing  with  the  Heidelberg  Catechism  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  The  Methodists  and  the 
different  kinds  of  Baptists  are  daughters  of  the  Reformed 
Church  and  have  the  conception  of  the  Heidelberg  Cate- 
chism in  the  doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  What  do  all 
these  Reformed  churches  teach  on  the  Lord's  Supper? 
All  agree  on  this :  Bread  and  wine  are  mere  signs  of 
the  absent  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ.     Bread  and  wine 


*Ivater,  1540,  in  the  so-called  altered  Augsburg  Confession  fVariata), 
after  the  death  of  Zwingli,  Melanchthon  eliminated  this  phrase:  "and  they 
disapprove  of  those  who  teach  otherwise."  He  also  removed  the  words 
"truly  present"  which  were  a  stumbling  block  to  the  sympathizers  with 
Zwingli.  He  must  have  done  it  with  the  viev/  of  uniting  the  Reformed 
with  the  Lutherans  on  the  basis  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  At  first  no 
special  objection  was  made  against  it.  But  when  at  a  later  time  it  was 
found  that  the  followers  of  Melanchthon.  who  went  further  than  Melanch 
thon  himself  would  have  done,  were  taking  steps  to  sell  out  to  Calvinism, 
and  when  they  tried  to  accomplish  it  under  the  cover  of  the  altered  edition 
of  1540,  then  the  Lutherans  becam.e  alarmed,  and  from  now  on  demanded 
that  the  "unaltered"  Augsburg  Confession,  meaning  by  that  the  edition  of 
1530-31,  should  be  accepted. 


104  'I'he  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

remind  us  of  the  crucified  Body  and  the  shed  Blood  of 
Christ.  It  is  as  if  we  would  look  at  a  painting  of  the 
crucified  Saviour  and  be  reminded  of  His  death  for  us. 
This  was  as  far  as  Zwingli  would  go.  Calvin  and  the 
churches  following  him  went  a  little  further:  If  our 
faith  is  strong  enough  then  it  lifts  itself  up  in  the  power 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  right  hand  of  God  where 
Christ's  humanity  is  confined  and  there  we  become  par- 
takers of  His  Body  and  Blood.  The  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ  are  not  present  in  the  Supper,  because  Body  can  be 
only  in  one  place  at  one  time.  We  can  therefore  not  take 
part  of  the  Body  of  Christ  orally,  but  only  spiritually 
through  faith.  If  we  come  to  examine  carefully  what 
some  of  the  Reformed  Confessions  mean  by  partaking  of 
the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  we  will  find  that  they  mean 
nothing  more  than  to  partake  of  the  power  of  Christ's 
sufferings  and  death.  In  the  Lord's  Supper  we  receive 
substantially  the  same  that  we  receive  already  in  the 
Word. 

b.  Hoiv  zvould  we  sum  up  the  difference  between 
the  Lutheran  Church  and  the  Reformed  churches  on  the 
doctrine  of  the  Lord's  Supper f  i.  The  Real  Presence. 
The  Lutherans  say :  The  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are 
present  in  the  Supper,  and  this  heavenly  gift  can  be  pres- 
ent, because  the  humanity  of  Christ  in  its  glorified  condi- 
tion is  like  His  divinity:  omnipresent,  omnipotent,  etc. 
The  Reformed  say:  Christ  according  to  His  humanity  is 
not  present  in  the  Supper,  because  as  man  He  is  con- 
fined to  that  one  place  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  His 
humanity  has  no  part  in  the  attributes  of  His  divine 
nature,  it  is  not  omnipresent.  2.  The  communication. 
The  Lutherans  say :  Since  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are 
present,  the  believer  needs  not  to  strain  himself  at  the 
altar,  as  if  to  draw  down  the  heavenly  gift.  If  he  is 
spiritually  hungry  and  thirsty,  he  simply  needs  to  eat  and 
to  drink.  This  is  the  means  of  communication.  The 
Reformed  say :  Since  the  humanity  of  Christ  is  far  away 
from  the  communicant  he  must  make  special  efforts  to 
bring  himself  into  communion  with  Christ.  The  com- 
munion becomes  the  test  of  a  strong  faith  instead  that 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  105 

it  should  be  the  nourishment  for  a  weak  faith.  3.  The 
character  of  the  Sacrament.  The  Lutherans  say :  There 
is  an  essential  difference  between  a  preaching  ser\^ice  and 
a  Communion.  At  the  Communion  the  object,  of  course, 
is  also  the  reconciliation  of  man  with  God.  But  in  addi- 
tion to  this  we  have  the  confirmation  of  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  through  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  as  a  pledge 
and  a  seal.  And  in  the  Communion  we  come  in  real  con- 
tact with  Christ  as  our  brother.  The  Reformed  say : 
There  is  no  essential  difference  between  a  common  reli- 
gious service  and  the  Communion.  In  both  cases  the 
heavenly  gift  consists  of  spiritual  influences  which  must 
be  received  by  a  special  exercise  of  our  faith.  Very 
characteristic  is  the  following  which  is  told  of  a  Method- 
ist congregation.  On  Communion  Sundays  this  con- 
gregation always  has  a  weak  attendance,  because  people 
say:  Oh,  to-day  it  is  just  Communion;  we  will  wait 
until  there  is  preaching.  Quite  consistent!  If  the  aim  is 
merely  to  be  reminded  of  Christ's  death  and  to  strengthen 
our  faith  in  Christ  then  a  preaching  service  is  more  help- 
ful than  a  Communion. 

c.  Now  we  will  be  prepared  to  answer  our  question : 
7^  it  right  for  the  Augsburg  Confession  to  reject  the 
teaching  of  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  Lord's  Supper? 
We  have  seen  that  the  two  positions  are  opposed  to  each 
other  like  Yes  and  No.  They  cannot  be  harmonized  into 
one  view.  It  has  been  tried  many  times  in  history,  and 
it  has  always  failed.  If  the  "German  Evangelical  Synod 
of  North  America"  has  succeeded  in  establishing  an 
organization  which  unites  Lutherans  and  Reformed  into 
one  body  then  it  has  been  done  on  the  basis  that  the 
distinguishing  points  are  matters  of  indifference.  This 
certainly  is  unfaithfulness  to  truth.  Such  position  carries 
with  it  laxness  in  Scripture  truth  in  every  direction.  No, 
it  cannot  be  otherwise :  the  Reformed  must  reject  our 
position  and  we  must  reject  the  position  of  the  Reformed. 
It  is  a  plain  case  of  Yes  and  No,  both  of  which  cannot 
dwell  together  in  one  conviction.  The  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion wisely  refuses  to  endorse  that  middle-of-the-road- 
policy  which  has  gained  favor  with  many  in  our  day. 


io6  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

When  it  establishes  a  doctrine  on  the  basis  of  the  divine 
Word  then  it  calls  the  opposing  doctrine  an  error  and 
rejects  it. 

ARTICLE  ELEVEN. 
O^  Concession. 

Of  Confession,  they  teach,  that  Private  Absolution  ought  to 
be  retained  in  the  churches,  although  in  confession  an  enumera- 
tion of  all  sins  is  not  necessary.  For  it  is  impossible,  according 
to  the  Psalm:    "Who  can  understand  his  errors?"  (Ps.  19:  12). 

1.  What  do  we  understand  by  auricular  Confession? 

At  the  fourth  Lateran  Synod,  121 5,  it  was  decreed 
that  all  mortal  sins  of  which  a  person  has  knowledge 
should  be  confessed  to  the  priest.  Not  only  should  the 
sins  be  mentioned,  but  the  circumstances  under  which 
they  have  been  committed  are  to  be  told.  With  the  infor- 
mation thus  secured,  the  priest,  as  a  divinely  appointed 
judge,  is  to  say  what  steps  are  to  be  taken  to  secure  the 
divine  forgiveness. 

2.  Why  does  our  article  reject  auricular  Confession? 

a.  "An  enumeration  of  all  sins  is  not  necessary." 
It  is  not  commanded  in  the  Scriptures.  The  priest  has 
not  been  appointed  by  God  as  a  judge  over  the  consciences 
of  men. 

b.  "For  it  is  impossible,  according  to  the  Psalm : 
'Who  can  understand  his  errors'?"  (Ps.  19:  12).  We 
can  easily  deceive  ourselves  in  judging  the  nature  of  our 
own  sins.  In  Jer.  17:9  we  read:  "The  heart  is  deceitful 
above  all  things,  and  desperately  wicked :  who  can  know 
it?"  Neither  will  it  be  possible  for  us  always  to  dis- 
tinguish between  "mortal''  and  "venial"  sins.  We  can- 
not accept  the  artificial  distinction  of  the  Roman  Church 
which  names  seven  mortal  sins.  We  say :  every  sin  com- 
mitted by  the  unregenerated  and  by  him  who  is  not 
justified  is  a  mortal  sin,  and  all  sins  in  the  regenerated 
which  do  away  with  and  nullify  justification  are  mortal 
sins.  An  attempt,  therefore,  at  enumerating  the  mortal 
sins  before  a  priest  will  easily  be  a  deceptive  practice. 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  107 

3.  What  do  we  understand  by  private  absolution? 

We  distinguish  it  from  the  general  confession  and 
absolution  which  takes  place  at  the  preparation  of  the 
congregation  for  the  Lord's  Supper.  Read  Article  XXV 
in  the  second  part  of  our  Confession.  In  private  absolu- 
tion an  individual,  feeling  the  burden  of  special  sins  or 
his  general  sinfulness,  comes  of  his  own  free  will  to  his 
pastor  seeking  spiritual  comfort,  and  the  pastor  pro- 
nounces to  him  individually  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

4.  Is  private  Confession  compulsory? 

a.  The  Scriptures  teach  in  many  places  that  we  must 
confess  our  sins  (i  John  1:9;  Prov.  28:13;  Ps.  51), 
but  we  find  no  conclusive  proof  that  confession  must  be 
made  to  the  spiritual  leader  of  the  congregation,  as  a 
condition  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

b.  Luther,  who  put  a  very  high  estimate  upon  volun- 
tary private  confession,  took  the  position  that  it  must  not 
be  made  compulsory,  that  we  may  confess  to  whom- 
soever we  will,  that  the  all  important  thing  is  that  we 
confess  to  God.  From  this  position  Luther  never 
wavered,  although  he  always  warmly  recommended  volun- 
tary private  confession.  (In  Erlangen  Edition  of 
Luther's  works  compare  vol.  28,  pp.  248,  249,  250,  308; 
vol.  29,  p.  353 ;  vol.  10,  p.  401 ;  vol.  23,  p.  86.) 

c.  Our  article  says  with  precaution  ''that  Private 
Absolution  ought  to  he  retained  in  the  churches."  That 
compulsion  is  here  not  intended  we  see  from  the  follow- 
ing words  of  the  Schwabach  Articles :  ''Private  Confes- 
sion should  not  be  forced  with  laws."  And  in  the  elev- 
enth of  the  Marburg  Articles,  written  by  Luther,  we  read 
that  "Confession,  or  the  seeking  of  counsel  from  the 
pastor  or  a  friend  (Nachste)  should  not  be  forced,  but 
be  free."  Since  these  articles  were  the  sources  which 
Melanchthon  used  for  writing  our  Confession  they  are 
suggestive  in  the  interpretation  of  the  article  under  con- 
sideration. 

5.  Why  was  private  absolution  retained  in  the  Luth- 
eran Church? 

If  private  absolution  is  used  aright  and  care  is  taken 


io8  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

not  to  let  it  degenerate  into  the  auricular  confession  of 
the  Roman  Church  it  can  become  a  valuable  means  for 
promoting  the  religious  life  in  the  congregation.  It  calls 
especially  for  ministers  of  the  right  kind.  The  question 
is — as  Origen  said  already  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century — whether  ''high-priest-like-personalities  can  be 
found,  merciful  as  Christ  and  the  Apostles."  (Seeberg, 
History  of  Doctrines  I,  §  15).  Such  ministers  will 
remember  that  it  is  not  within  their  rights  to  ask  imperti- 
nent questions,  like  a  Roman  Catholic  priest  will  do. 
They  will  remember  that  as  far  as  duty  to  confess  sins 
goes,  the  sinner  needs  to  confess  to  God  alone ;  but  that 
it  is  the  privilege  of  those  with  a  troubled  conscience  to 
make  use  of  the  office  of  the  ministry  for  counsel  and 
assurance  of  divine  grace.  Luther  emphasized  the 
thought  that  one  may  also  make  confession  to  a  friend, 
in  accordance  with  James  5:16:  ''Confess  your  faults 
one  to  another,  and  pray  one  for  another,  that  ye  may 
be  healed." 

ARTICLE  TWELVE. 

O^  Repentance. 

Of  Repentance,  they  teach,  that  for  those  that  have  fallen 
after  Baptism,  there  is  remission  of  sins  whenever  they  are 
converted ;  and  that  the  Church  ought  to  impart  absolution  to 
those  thus  returning  to  repentance. 

Now  repentance  consists  properly  of  these  two  parts :  One 
is  contrition,  that  is,  terrors  smiting  the  conscience  through  the 
knowledge  of  sin;  the  other  is  faith,  which,  born  of  the  Gospel, 
or  of  absolution,  believes  that,  for  Christ's  sake,  sins  are  for- 
given, comforts  the  conscience  and  delivers  it  from  terrors 
Then  good  works  are  bound  to  follow,  which  are  the  fruits  of 
repentance. 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists,  who  deny  that  those  once 
justified  can  lose  the  Holy  Ghost.  Also  those  who  contend  that 
some  may  attain  to  such  perfection  in  this  life  that  they  cannot 
sin.  The  Novatians  also  are  condemned,  who  would  not  absolve 
such  as  had  fallen  after  Baptism,  though  they  returned  to  re- 
pentance. They  also  are  rejected  who  do  not  teach  that  remis- 
sion of  sins  cometh  through  faith,  but  command  us  to  merit 
grace  through  satisfactions  of  our  own. 

This  article  is  directed  against  four  special  errors 

which  are  enumerated  in  the  last  paragraph  of  our  text. 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  109 

We  have  a  rejection  (i)  of  the  Anabaptists;  (2)  of  the 
Perfectionists;  (3)  of  the  Novatians,  and  (4)  of  the 
Romanists.  The  latter  are  not  mentioned  by  name.  The 
first  paragraph  of  our  article  ofifers  the  positive  doctrine 
of  our  Lutheran  Church  against  the  Novatians,  and  in 
the  second  paragraph  we  have  the  doctrine  of  repentance 
as  opposed  to  the  Romanists. 

I.  Can  those  once  justified  lose  the  Holy  Ghost? 

The  Anabaptists  denied  it.  The  Schwenkfeldians  at 
the  time  of  the  Reformation  took  the  same  position.  The 
strict  Calvinists  also  deny  that  he  who  has  been  justified 
can  fall  from  grace.  He  may  fall  into  sins,  offend  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  wound  his  conscience  and  lose  the  feel- 
ing of  grace  for  a  time  (Synod  of  Dort),  but  he  cannot 
fall  forever.  This  is  in  harmony  with  the  doctrine  of 
absolute  and  unfailing  predestination.  Our  article  says: 
''They  (the  Lutheran  churches)  condemn  the  Ana- 
baptists, who  deny  that  those  once  justified  can  lose  the 
Holy  Ghost."  Such  doctrine  is  clearly  against  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Scriptures.  Matt.  26:41:  ''Watch  and  pray 
that  ye  enter  not  into  temptation:  the  spirit  indeed  is 
willing,  but  the  flesh  is  weak."  i  Peter  5:8:  "Be  sober, 
be  vigilant ;  because  your  adversary  the  devil,  as  a  roar- 
ing lion,  walketh  about,  seeking  whom  he  may  devour." 
I  Cor.  10:12:  "Wherefore  let  him  that  thinketh  he 
standeth  take  heed  lest  he  fall."  Gal.  5:4:  "Ye  are 
fallen  from  grace."  This  matter  is  further  discussed  by 
Luther  in  the  Smalcald  Articles  in  Part  III,  Article  HL 
line  42,  and  in  the  Form  of  Concord,  Article  IV,  line  31 
(second  part). 

2.  What  is  the  teaching  of  the  Perfectionists  and 
what  is  our  attitude  toward  them? 

a.  It  is  the  contention  "that  some  may  attain  to  such 
perfection  in  this  life  that  they  cannot  sin."  The  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  confirmed  the 
doctrine  that  the  justified  can  perfectly  live  up  to  the 
commandments  of  God.  The  Methodists  of  all  kinds 
emphasize    Christian    perfection    and    perfect    holiness. 


no  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

The  so-called  Oxford  Movement  (Pearsall  Smith)  stood 
for  this  doctrine.  Some  say  that  after  conversion  a 
second  religious  experience  is  to  follow  which  will  lead 
to  perfect  holiness. 

b.  To  this  we  answer:  The  sanctification  and  the 
renewal  of  the  believers  is  a  gradual  growth,  but  it  will 
always  remain  imperfect  in  this  life.  Paul  says :  "Not 
as  though  I  had  already  attained,  either  were  already 
perfect :  but  I  follow  after,  if  that  I  may  apprehend  that 
for  which  also  I  am  apprehended  of  Christ  Jesus." 
(Phil.  3:  12.)  And  in  i  John  i :  8  we  read:  "If  we  say 
that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth 
is  not  in  us."  Here  the  perfectionists  like  to  oppose: 
While  we  may  have  sin,  yet  we  need  not  to  sin ;  to  have 
sin  and  to  sin  are  two  quite  different  things.  But  how' 
will  they  then  answer  the  loth  verse  in  the  same  chapter? 
It  reads :  "If  we  say  that  we  have  not  sinned,  we  make 
him  a  liar,  and  his  word  is  not  in  us." 

Where  in  our  Confessions  do  we  find  more  on  this  subject? 
See  Apology,  Article  IV,  9;  Article  VI,  25;  Smalcald  Articles, 
Part  III,  Article  XIII,  2;  Small  Catechism.  Part  II,  Article 
III;  Part  III,  fifth  petition;  Part  IV,  12.  Larger  Catechism, 
Part  II,  Article  III,  57.  Fifth  petition  86;  Form  of  Concord, 
First  Part,  Article  VI,  4;  Second  Part,  Article  I,  14;  Article 
ir,  68,  84;   Article  III,  23;   Article  VI,  7,  21. 

3.  What  was  the  error  of  the  Novatians,  and  what 
do  we  oppose? 

a.  This  sect  of  the  early  Church  "would  not  absolve 
such  as  had  fallen  after  Baptism,  though  they  returned 
to  repentance."  The  Novatians  stood  for  absolute  purity 
of  the  Church.  If  Christians  after  their  Baptism  had 
fallen  into  grave  sins  they  were  to  be  excommunicated 
and  not  to  be  admitted  again  even  upon  repentance.  They 
should  be  left  to  the  mercy  of  God,  but  the  Church  should 
not  defile  itself  with  them. 

b.  The  Lutheran  Church  also  stands  for  excommuni- 
cation of  those  who  are  living  in  grave  sins  and  are  im- 
penitent, according  to  i  Cor.  5:4,  5,  11.  Paul  says 
in  the  13th  verse:  "Therefore  put  away  from  among 
yourselves  that  wicked  person."     But  at  the  same  time 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  hi 

our  Church  says  in  this  twelfth  article  of  its  Confession 
''that  for  those  that  have  fallen  after  Baptism,  there  is 
remission  of  sins  whenever  they  are  converted ;  and  that 
the  Church  ought  to  impart  absolution  to  those  thus 
returning  to  repentance."  This  is  the  plain  teaching  of 
the  Scriptures,  i  John  i :  7  we  read :  "The  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ,  his  Son,  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin,"  The 
admission  of  all  to  repentance  is  emphasized  in  the  fol- 
lowing passages :  "Come  unto  me,  all  ye  that  labour  and 
are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest."  (Matt,  ii  : 
28.)  "Him  that  cometh  to  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out." 
(John  6:  37.)  The  Lord  "is  not  willing  that  any  should 
perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance."  2  Pet. 
3:9).  And  it  is  utterly  against  the  spirit  of  the  Scrip- 
tures that  they  whom  Christ  accepts  should  be  excluded 
from  the  "Holy  Christian  Church  and  the  Communion 
of  Saints"  where  according  to  Luther's  explanation  of 
the  third  article  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  "he  daily  forgives 
abundantly  all  my  sins,  and  the  sins  of  all  believers"; 
it  is  inconceivable  that  they  should  remain  excluded  from 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  which  was  instituted  as  a 
means  of  grace. 

4.  What  part  of  our  article  is  especially  directed 
against  the  Roman  Catholic  Church? 

Note  the  closing  words :  "They  also  are  rejected  who 
do  not  teach  that  remission  of  sins  cometh  through  faith, 
but  command  us  to  merit  grace  through  satisfactions  of 
our  own."  With  this  passage,  which  plainly  reminds  us 
of  Article  R',  the  second  paragraph  of  our  article  may 
fittingly  be  taken  together.  It  is  a  very  valuable  defini- 
tion of  what  repentance  is  in  the  conception  of  the  Luth- 
eran Church. 

a.  Of  zuhat  parts  does  repentance  consist  according  to 
Roman  Catholic  theology?  Of  three  parts:  (i)  contri- 
tion of  the  heart;  (2)  oral  confession;  (3)  satisfaction 
through  good  works.  Of  these,  contrition  only  can  be 
admitted.  What  is  our  objection  against  the  two  other 
parts?  They  deprive  the  penitent  sinner  of  the  assurance 
of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  thus  of  true  comfort.    If 


112  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

the  genuineness  of  repentance  is  to  be  dependent  upon 
an  enumeration  of  all  mortal  sins  in  auricular  Confes- 
sion then  the  penitent  sinner  will  always  have  to  ask: 
Did  I  do  all  my  duty  ?  Did  I  mention  all  sins  ?  Further- 
more, if  works  of  satisfaction  are  part  of  repentance  as 
the  condition  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  then  he  with  a 
troubled  conscience  will  always  have  to  ask :  Did  I  do 
enough  ?    Were  my  works  sufficient  ? 

b.  What  doctrine  does  our  article  oppose?  "Now 
repentance  consists  properly  of  these  two  parts :  One  is 
contrition,  that  is,  terrors  smiting  the  conscience  through 
the  knowledge  of  sin;  the  other  is  faith,  which,  born  of 
the  Gospel,  or  of  absolution,  believes  that,  for  Christ's 
sake,  sins  are  forgiven,  comforts  the  conscience,  and 
delivers  it  from  terrors."  Contrition  and  faith  are  the 
two  parts  of  which  repentance  consists.  Read  the  follow- 
ing passages  of  Scripture:  Luke  18:13;  Ps.  51:19; 
Acts  16:30-31.  The  other  Confessions  deal  with  this 
subject  in  the  following  places :  Apology,  Article  XII. 
Smalcald  Articles,  Part  III,  Article  III.  Form  of  Con- 
cord, Second  Part,  Article  II,  14.    Article  V,  7  f. 

Re:mark. — Good  works  are  excluded  from  the  definition  of  re- 
pentance, because  it  would  lead  to  work-righteousness.  Yet  they 
must  follow  as  our  article  says :  "Then  good  works  are  bound  to 
follow,  which  are  the  fruits  of  repentance." 

ARTICLE  THIRTEEN. 

Of  thk  Use  01^  THK  Sacraments. 

Of  the  Use  of  the  Sacraments,  they  teach,  that  the  Sacraments 
were  ordained,  not  only  to  be  marks  of  profession  among  men, 
but  rather  to  be  signs  and  testimonies  of  the  will  of  God  toward 
us,  instituted  to  awaken  and  confirm  faith  in  those  who  use 
them.  Wherefore  we  must  so  use  the  Sacraments  that  faith 
be  added  to  believe  the  promises  which  are  offered  and  set  forth 
through  the  Sacraments. 

They  therefore  condemn  those  who  teach  that  the  Sacraments 
justify  by  the  outward  act,  and  do  not  teach  that,  in  the  use  of 
the  Sacraments,  faith  which  believes  that  sins  are  forgiven,  is 
required. 

I.  What  was  ONE  purpose  for  ordaining  the  Sacra- 
ments to  be  used  in  the  Church? 


The;  Augsburg  Confession.  113 

"To  be  marks  of  profession  among  men."  By  using 
Baptism  and  Lord's  Supper  men  will  know  each  other 
as  Christians.  He  who  is  not  baptized  and  does  not  go 
to  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  is  no  Christian.  This  was  a 
thought  emphasized  by  Zwingli.  To  him  the  Sacraments 
with  their  symbolic  meaning  were  chiefly  ''marks  of  pro- 
fession among  men." 

2.  But  for  what  purpose  have  the  Sacraments  been 
MAINLY  instituted? 

"But  rather  to  be  signs  and  testimonies  of  the  will 
of  God  toward  us,  instituted  to  awaken  and  confirm 
faith  in  those  who  use  them."  Baptism  is  to  "awaken" 
faith  in  us.  It  is  to  us  a  testimony,  a  seal  and  a  pledge  for 
the  forgiveness  of  our  sins  and  our  regeneration  through 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Through  all  our  life  we  shall  use  it 
for  this  purpose.  The  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  is  to 
"confirm"  faith  in  us.  It  is  testimony,  seal  and  pledge 
of  the  closest  communion  with  our  Saviour  whose  Body 
and  Blood  we  eat  and  drink  for  the  remission  of  sins. 

3.  What  is,  therefore,  necessary  for  receiving  the 
benefits  of  the  Sacraments? 

"That  faith  be  added  to  believe  the  promises  which  are 
offered  and  set  forth  through  the  Sacraments."  The 
Sacrament  as  such  exists  independently  of  faith,  but 
faith  is  the  hand  with  which  we  receive  the  benefit  which 
it  oft'ers.     Mark  16:16;    i  Cor.  11:26. 

4.  What  viev^^  is  here  condemned? 

"That  the  Sacraments  justify  by  the  outward  acts," 
or  "ex  opere  operato,"  as  we  read  in  the  original.  This 
last  paragraph  was  not  in  the  documents  delivered  at 
Augsburg,  but  was  added  by  Melanchthon  when  the  first 
edition  for  print  was  prepared.  It  is  not  in  the  German 
copy  because  this  dates  from  a  time  when  the  Confession 
was  not  fully  finished  as  we  have  seen  in  Part  Two  of  this 
book.  This  paragraph  is  directed  against  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  which  says  that  the  Sacraments  com- 
municate their  benefits  to  every  participant  who  does  not 
intentionally   hinder   the   operation   of   grace,    faith   not 


114  'I'he  Augsburg  Confession. 

being  necessary.  In  foreign  missionary  work  Roman 
Catholic  missionaries  have  taken  children  from  their 
heathen  parents,  secretly  baptizing  them,  and  then  re- 
ported them  as  Christians.  According  to  this  an  idiot 
would  participate  with  profit  in  the  Holy  Communion. 

ARTICLE  FOURTEEN. 

Of  Ecclesiastical  Order. 

Of  Ecclesiastical  Order,  they  teach,  that  none  should  publicly 
teach  in  the  Church  or  administer  the  Sacraments,  unless  he  be 
regularly  called. 

1.  What  is  the  object  of  this  article? 

To  establish  a  principle  with  respect  to  administering 
the  means  of  grace,  that  will  secure  good  order  in  the 
Church. 

The  office  of  teaching  the  Word  and  administering 
the  Sacraments  belongs  to  the  Church  as  a  whole.  It 
is  not  a  possession  of  the  bishops  only,  as  the  Roman 
and  Greek  Catholics  say.  The  congregations,  repre- 
sented in  church  bodies  (synods),  co-operate  in  pro- 
ducing the  ministry  (theological  seminaries).  The  local 
congregations  have  the  right  to  extend  the  call  to  their 
ministers.  In  addition  to  this,  we  believe  in  the  universal 
priesthood  of  all  believers  (i  Pet.  2:9).  In  cases  of 
extreme  necessity  even  laymen  can  administer  Baptism. 
And  to-day  we  employ  our  laymen  in  Sunday  schools  and 
all  kinds  of  meetings. 

The  question  now  is :  How  can  the  Lutherans,  when 
giving  such  rights  to  the  congregations,  maintain  the 
order  necessary  in  the  Church  of  Christ  with  reference 
to  teaching  and  administering  the  Sacraments  ? 

2.  What  principle  is  here  established? 

''That  no  one  should  publicly  teach  in  the  church  or 
administer  the  Sacraments,  unless  he  he  regularly  called 
(nisi  rite  vocatus)."     Rom.  10:15;    Heb.  5:4. 


Thk  Augsburg  Confession.  115 

3.  What  would  we  consider  a  regular  call  to  the 
ministry? 

a.  We  stated  that  the  congregations  have  the  right 
to  call  their  pastors.  But  suppose  some  local  congrega- 
tion should  be  misled  by  a  worthless  individual,  would 
such  an  one  have  the  right  to  regard  himself  as  a  minister 
of  the  Gospel  and  could  he  expect  to  be  called  by  other 
congregations?  Certainly  not.  This  then  shows  that 
as  far  as  the  calling  to  the  ministry  in  general  is  con- 
cerned there  must  be  other  factors  to  co-operate  with 
the  local  congregation  if  anyone  is  to  have  the  regular 
call. 

b.  Not  the  mere  fact  that  he  holds  a  call  from  a  local 
congregation  makes  a  man  a  minister  of  the  Gospel  in 
the  Christian  Church,  but  in  addition  to  an  inner  call, 
he  must  have  received  a  training  for  this  office,  and 
during  such  period  of  training  he  must  have  been  tested 
by  teachers  and  finally  must  have  received  the  recom- 
mendation for  an  ordination  to  the  ministry,  and  this 
ordination  must  have  been  carried  out  by  men  who  had 
an  instruction  to  do  so  by  a  representation  of  Christian 
congregations.  If  the  call  from  a  congregation  comes 
as  the  crowning  act  upon  these  preceding  acts,  then  he 
has  the  right  to  teach  publicly  in  the  church  and  to 
administer  the  Sacraments. 

c.  This  question  is  sometimes  confused  by  not  dis- 
tinguishing between  the  call  to  the  ministry  in  general 
and  the  call  to  administer  the  means  of  grace  in  a  given 
congregation.  If  we  have  in  mind  the  work  of  a  minister 
in  an  individual  congregation  and  do  not  include  his 
recognition  by  the  Church  at  large  then  even  the  fact 
that  the  congregation  may  have  been  misled  in  calling 
him  would  not  make  his  ministerial  acts  invalid.  Here 
the  principle  expressed  in  Article  VIII  on  the  basis  of 
Matt.  23 :  2  would  hold :  "The  scribes  and  the  Pharisees 
sit  in  Moses'  seat."  God  will  forgive  what  has  been 
sinned  in  ignorance.  But  it  would  be  a  dangerous  prin- 
ciple to  say:  Since  this  man  has  succeeded  in  being 
called  by  a  congregation  he  is  now  a  regular  minister 


ii6  The:  Augsburg  Confession, 

of  the  Gospel  and  can  claim  the  right  to  be  presented  to 
any  congregation. 

4.  But  how  about  the  teaching  of  laymen  in  our 
churches? 

a.  According  to  the  reading  of  this  article,  can  they 
who  have  not  been  ordained  for  the  ministry  teach  in 
Sunday  schools  and  conduct  devotional  services  in  Young 
People's  meetings?  Note  that  it  here  says  "that  no  one 
should  publicly  teach  in  the  church,"  etc.  By  this  was 
meant  the  public  preaching  of  the  Word  on  Sundays  in 
the  pulpit.  This  is  a  work  that  shall  be  left  to  the  regu- 
larly called  pastor  of  the  congregation. 

b.  If  an  able  layman  or  a  theological  student  in  times 
of  vacancy  should  be  called  by  a  congregation  to  help  out 
temporarily  then  he  would  have  for  such  limited  time 
the  regular  call. 

The  object  is  that  everything  be  done  ''decently  and 
in  order"  in  the  Church  (i  Cor.  14:40). 

ARTICLE  FIFTEEN. 
Of  Ritks  and  Usages. 

Of  Rites  and  Usages  in  the  Church,  they  teach,  that  those 
ought  to  be  observed  which  may  be  observed  without  sin,  and 
which  are  profitable  unto  tranquiUity  and  good  order  in  the 
Church,  as  particular  holydays,  festivals,  and  the  like. 

Nevertheless,  concerning  such  things,  let  men  be  admonished 
that  consciences  are  not  to  be  burdened,  as  though  such 
observance  was  necessary  to  salvation.  They  are  admonished 
also  that  human  traditions  instituted  to  propitiate  God,  to  merit 
grace  and  to  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are  opposed  to  the 
Gospel  and  the  doctrine  of  faith.  Wherefore  vows  and  tradi- 
tions concerning  meats  and  days,  etc.,  instituted  to  merit  grace 
and  to  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are  useless  and  contrary  to 
the  Gospel. 

I.  What  is  the  aim  of  this  article? 

To  lay  down  principles  regarding  usages  in  the  Church 
that  cannot  claim  to  have  a  divine  commandment  to  sup- 
port them.  Things  that  God  has  clearly  commanded  in 
His  Word  must  be  observed.    There  can  be  no  argument 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  117 

about  that.  But  how  with  so  many  things  which  have 
come  to  be  usages  in  the  whole  Church,  or  in  parts  of 
the  Church,  on  which  there  may  be  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  whether  they  can  be  demanded  or  not?  For  in- 
stance, what  shall  be  our  attitude  toward  the  order  of 
service  (liturgy),  toward  the  question  of  holydays  and 
festivals  (Christmas,  Easter,  Good  Friday,  Ascension 
Day,  Pentecost)  ?  The  special  aim  of  this  article  is  to 
lay  down  principles  by  which  we  may  be  guided. 

2.  What  rites  and  usages  ought  to  be  observed? 

Such  as  "are  profitable  unto  tranquillity  and  good  order 
in  the  Church."  An  institution  such  as  the  Church  will 
develop  out  of  its  own  life  and  experience  a  good  many 
things  that  are  helpful  for  the  promotion  of  good  order. 
A  few  examples  may  be  cited :  It  is  an  order  of  the 
Church  that  a  marriage  shall  be  formally  solemnized  with 
an  appropriate  service  before  the  married  life  begins. 
The  custom  of  not  going  to  Communion  before  Confirma- 
tion is  also  an  order  of  the  Church.  Ordination  even 
does  not  rest  upon  a  divine  command,  but  it  is  a  most 
wholesome  usage  of  the  Church,  helpful  to  discriminate 
against  those  that  should  not  be  entrusted  with  the 
sacred  office.  A  good  Scriptural  liturgy,  which  gives 
proportion  and  solemnity  to  the  services  of  the  sanctuary, 
and  helps  to  edify  the  w^orshiping  congregation  is  also 
an  ordinance.  Of  such,  and  many  other  things,  we 
would  say  that  they  ''ought  to  be  observed." 

3.  What  should  be  the  motives  for  observing  them? 

a.  They  ''are  profitable/'  If  we  take  each  case  by 
itself  we  can  easily  show  in  what  way  they  are  profitable. 

b.  Parts  of  Article  XXVIII  should  be  studied  in 
connection  with  this  article.  There,  on  page  65  (line  55), 
we  read  of  the  following  motive :  *'It  is  proper  that  the 
churches  should  keep  such  ordinances  for  the  sake  of 
charity  and  tranquillity,  so  far  that  one  do  not  offend 
another." 

c.  Another  motive  for  observing  such  ordinances  of 
the  Church  is  that  they  can  ''be  observed  zmthout  sin!' 


ii8  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

4.  But  what  should  never  be  the  motive  for  their 
observance? 

•'Xet  men  be  admonished  that  consciences  are  not  to 
be  burdened,  as  though  such  observance  was  necessary 
to  salvation."  Beware  of  making  meritorious  works  of 
these  observances!  If  we  should  urge  the  observance  of 
these  things  by  speaking  of  them  as  if  they  were  neces- 
sary for  salvation  then  we  would  burden  the  consciences. 
Article  XXVIII  dwells  upon  this  thought. 

5.  Does  the  Sunday  also  come  under  the  discussion 
of  "Rites  and  Usages"  in  the  Church? 

a.  The  Augsburg  Confession.  The  Sunday  is  not 
mentioned  in  this  article,  which  speaks  only  of  ''particular 
holydays,  festivals,  and  the  like."  But  in  Article  XXVIII 
(page  65,  line  53)  we  read:  "What,  then,  are  we  to 
think  of  the  Sunday  and  like  rites  in  the  house  of  God?" 
Again:  "Of  this  kind,  is  the  observance  of  the  Lord's 
Day,  Easter,  Pentecost,  and  like  holydays  and  rites.  For 
those  who  judge  that,  by  the  authority  of  the  Church, 
the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day,  instead  of  the  Sabbath 
Day,  was  ordained  as  a  thing  necessary,  do  greatly  err. 
Scripture  has  abrogated  the  Sabbath  Day ;  for  it  teaches 
that,  since  the  Gospel  has  been  revealed,  all  the  cere- 
monies of  Moses  can  be  omitted.  And  yet,  because  it 
was  necessary  to  appoint  a  certain  day,  that  the  people 
might  know  when  they  ought  to  come  together,  it  appears 
that  the  Church  (the  Apostles)  designated  the  Lord's 
Day  for  this  purpose;  and  this  day  seems  to  have  been 
chosen  all  th^  more  for  this  additional  reason,  that  men 
might  have  an  example  of  Christian  liberty,  and  might 
know  that  the  keeping  neither  of  the  Sabbath,  nor  of 
any  other  day,  is  necessary."  It  is  admitted  (i)  that  by 
not  observing  the  day  we  may  make  ourselves  guilty  of 
the  sin  of  giving  "offence  to  others."  That  this  must  be 
avoided  is  repeated  three  times :  "sine  offensione  aliorum" 
(without  offence  to  others).  The  thought  always  re- 
curs :  "It  is  proper  that  the  churches  should  keep  such 
ordinances  for  the  sake  of  charity  and  tranquillity."     It 


The  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  119 

is  admitted  (2)  that  it  is  lawful  for  the  authorities  of 
the  Church  *'to  appoint  a  certain  day,  that  the  people 
might  know  when  they  ought  to  come  together"  for  wor- 
ship, so  that  ''things  be  done  orderly  in  the  Church." 
But  it  is  insisted  upon  (3)  that  the  observance  of  the 
day  is  not  "necessary  to  salvation,"  as  it  is  to  be  num- 
bered among  "the  ceremonies  of  Moses,"  which  have 
been  "abrogated,"  according  to  Col.  2:  16. 

b.  Luther's  Larger  Catechism  must  be  taken  together 
with  the  expositions  of  Alelanchthon  in  the  Augsburg 
Confession.  Luther,  in  his  interpretation  of  the  Third 
Commandment,  says  that  this  commandment  "according 
to  its  gross  sense  does  not  pertain  to  us  Christians."  The 
Sabbath  "in  this  gross  sense"  is  numbered  among  "the 
other  ordinances  of  the  Old  Testament,"  "which  have 
now  been  made  free  through  Christ."  Yet  Luther  wants 
the  day  to  be  recognized  as  a  day  of  rest,  "first  of  all 
for  bodily  causes  and  necessities,  which  nature  teaches 
and  requires ;  and  for  the  common  people,  man-servants 
and  maid-servants,  who  are  occupied  the  whole  week 
with  their  work  and  trade,  that  for  a  day  they  may  for- 
bear, in  order  to  rest  and  be  refreshed."  Luther  agrees 
with  Melanchthon  than  an  observance  of  the  Lord's 
Day  cannot  be  based  upon  the  law  of  Moses.  He  bases 
it  upon  the  order  of  creation.  He  retains  the  command- 
ment:  "Remember  the  Sabbath  (Feiertag,  day  of  rest) 
to  keep  it  holy."  He  asks :  "What  is  meant  by  keeping 
it  holy?"  and  he  answers:  "Nothing  else  than  to  be 
occupied  in  holy  words,  works  and  life.  For  the  day 
needs  so  sanctification  for  itself ;  for  in  itself  it  has 
been  created  holy  (from  the  beginning  of  the  creation 
it  was  sanctified  by  its  Creator).  But  God  desires  it  to 
be  holy  to  thee."  The  chief  thing  for  Luther  is  to 
"sanctify  the  Sabbath,  or  Day  of  Rest,"  "through  God's 
Word,"  "so  that  to  this  day  belongs  a  special  holy  exer- 
cise." But  through  this  "holy  exercise"  we  shall  sanctify 
the  day.  Luther  says :  "Since,  therefore,  so  much  de- 
pends upon  God's  Word  that  without  it  no  Sabbath  can 
be  kept  holy,  we  ought  to  know  that  God  will  insist  upon 
a  strict  observance  of  this  commandment,  and  will  punish 


120  The  Augsburg  Coni^i:ssion. 

all  who  despise  His  Word  and  are  not  willing  to  hear 
and  learn  it,  especially  at  the  time  appointed  for  the 
purpose." 

6.  What  rites  and  usages  are  positively  to  be  ex- 
cluded from  observance? 

We  read  in  our  Article  XV:  "They  are  admonished 
also  that  human  traditions  instituted  to  propitiate  God, 
to  merit  grace  and  to  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  are 
opposed  to  the  Gospel  and  the  doctrine  of  faith.  Where- 
fore vows  and  traditions  concerning  meats  and  days, 
etc.,  instituted  to  merit  grace  and  to  make  satisfaction 
for  sins,  are  useless  and  contrary  to  the  Gospel."  For 
an  illustration  of  what  here  is  meant  read  xA.rticle  XXVI. 

ARTICLE  SIXTEEN. 
O^  Civil  Afi^airs. 

1.  What  are  the  leading  thoughts  of  this  article? 

a.  Civil  government  is  a  divine  institution. 

b.  It  is  right  to  hold  property. 

c.  Marriage  is  a  state  pleasing  to  God. 

2.  What  does  our  Church  teach  on  civil  govern- 
ment? 

a.  ''That  it  is  right  for  Christians  to  bear  civil  office." 
Compare  Apolog}%  Article  XVI ;  Form  of  Concord,  First 
Part,  Article  XII,  12,  etc.;  Second  Part,  Article  XII,  17.; 
In  Romans  13:  i  we  read:  ''There  is  no  power  but  of 
God :  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God."  The 
Anabaptists  taught  that  among  Christians  there  was  no 
government  necessary.  The  Quakers  forbid  their  mem- 
bers to  bear  civil  office  because  of  the  danger  of  com- 
promising their  principles  with  respect  to  war,  oath, 
etc.  The  Mennonites  take  the  same  position.  The 
Reformed  Presbyterians  (Covenanters)  say  that  a  Chris- 
tian cannot  bear  civil  office,  unless  the  constitution  of 
the  government  recognizes  God  as  the  source  of  all 
power. 


The:  Augsburg  Confe;ssion.  121 

b.  It  is  right  for  Christians  "to  sit  as  judges,  to 
determine  matters  by  the  Imperial  and  other  existing 
laws,  to  award  just  punishments."  The  "existing  laws" 
of  a  country  are  not  always  identical  with  the  divine 
laws.  They  cannot  be.  The  divine  laws  as  contained  in 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  in  many  cases,  have  to  express  the 
Christian  ideal,  while  the  laws  of  a  civil  government, 
under  the  existing  conditions  of  society,  cannot  go  above 
the  level  of  general  ethics.  For  instance,  the  divorce 
laws  of  a  country  cannot  be  confined  to  the  same  as  what 
the  Scriptures  admit  as  grounds  for  a  divorce.  But  then 
the  question  comes :  Can  a  Christian  be  a  judge  and 
determine  matters  by  the  "existing  laws"?  According 
to  our  article,  he  can.  He  need  only  be  "just."  The 
Lutheran  Church  does  not  believe  in  a  theocracy  such 
as  Calvin  endeavored  to  establish  in  Geneva,  and  Knox 
had  intended  for  Scotland.  Lutheranism  has  always 
stood  for  a  separation  between  Church  and  state. 

c.  It  is  also  right  for  Christians  "to  engage  in  just 
wars,  to  serve  as  soldiers."  This  follows  from  Romans 
13:  I.    Read  Article  XVI  in  the  Apology. 

d.  Our  article  teaches  obedience  to  the  government: 
"Therefore,  Christians  are  necessarily  bound  to  obey 
their  own  magistrates  and  laws."  Paul  taught  obedience 
to  the  government  even  though  a  Nero  was  on  the  throne. 
According  to  Romans  13  we  must  be  subject  to  the 
"powers  that  be."  An  evil  government  is  better  than  no 
government.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
that  she  has  always  been  opposed  to  revolution.  In  this 
Lutherans  differ  from  the  Reformed  people  who  have 
always  been  quick  to  take  up  arms  against  the  govern- 
ment. Our  article  says  that  we  are  only  justified  in  not 
obeying  the  government  when  it  commands  us  to  sin, 
"for  then  we  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  men."  (Acts 
5:29.) 

3.  What  does  this  article  say  on  the  question  of 
holding  property? 

It  is  right  for  Christians  "to  make  legal  contracts, 
to   hold   property."     This   is   opposed   to   the   manifold 


122  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

forms  of  communism.  Melanchthon  says  in  Article  XVI 
of  the  Apology :  ''For  Scripture  does  not  command  that 
property  be  common,  but  the  Law  of  the  Decalogue, 
when  it  says  (Ex.  20:  15)  :  'Thou  shalt  not  steal,'  dis- 
tinguishes rights  of  ownership,  and  commands  each  one 
to  hold  what  is  his  own." 

4.  What  does  our  article  say  on  the  state  of  mar- 
riage? 

That  it  is  right  for  Christians  "to  marry,  to  be  given 
in  marriage."  The  further  exposition  of  this  part  of 
our  article  is  found  in  Article  XXIII  of  our  Confession, 
and  also  in  Article  XXIII  of  the  Apology.  There  all 
passages  of  Scripture  bearing  on  this  subject  are  quoted. 
The  Roman  Catholic  Church  regarded  the  married  life 
as  an  inferior  state  and  therefore  demanded  celibacy  for 
the  priests.  The  Lutheran  Church  takes  the  position  that 
the  Christian  virtues  shall  be  exercised  in  the  state  of 
marriage. 

ARTICLE  SEVENTEEN. 
Christ's  Return  to  Judgment. 

Also  they  teach,  that,  at  the  Consummation  of  the  World, 
Christ  shall  appear  for  judgment,  and  shall  raise  up  all  the  dead; 
He  shall  give  to  the  godly  and  elect  eternal  life  and  everlasting 
joys,  but  ungodly  men  and  the  devils  He  shall  condemn  to  be 
tormented  without  end. 

They  condemn  the  Anabaptists  who  think  that  there  will  be 
an  end  to  the  punishments  of  condemned  men  and  devils.  They 
condemn  also  others  who  are  now  spreading  certain  Jewish 
opinions,  that,  before  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  the  godly 
shall  take  possession  of  the  kingdom  of  the  world,  the  ungodly 
being  everywhere   suppressed    (exterminated). 

This  article  closes  the  body  of  doctrines  treated  in  the 
Augsburg  Confession.  The  following  three  articles  are 
supplementary :  XVIII  and  XIX  to  Article  II,  and  XX 
to  Articles  IV  and  VI.  The  last  article  of  the  first  part 
of  the  Confession  (XXI  on  Invocation  of  Saints)  pre- 
pares for  the  articles  of  the  second  part  on  abuses. 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  123 

1.  What  is  taught  concerning  Christ's  coming  at  the 
consummation  of  the  world? 

a.  "Christ  shall  appear."  It  means  that  He  shall 
appear  visibly.  In  Acts  i :  11  we  read:  "This  same 
Jesus,  which  is  taken  up  from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so 
come  in  like  manner  as  ye  have  seen  Him  go  into 
heaven." 

b.  He  "shall  appear  for  judgment."  John  5 :  22 : 
"For  the  Father  .  .  .  hath  committed  all  judgment 
unto  the  Son."  And,  referring  to  the  thought  in  Article 
III,  we  emphasize  that  Christ  will  hold  judgment  accord- 
ing to  both  of  His  natures.  We  have  no  right  here  to 
divide  Christ  and  say,  as  the  Reformed  do,  that  He  will 
be  judge  only  according  to  His  divine  nature.  In  John 
5:27  we  read:  "And  (the  Father)  hath  given  Him 
authority  to  execute  judgment  also,  because  He  is  the 
Son  of  man."  The  opponents  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ's 
return  to  judgment  are  the  Swedenborgians,  the  Uni- 
tarians, the  Universalists,  the  Independent  Protestants 
of  Cincinnati,  etc.,  and  the  Christian  Scientists. 

2.  What  is  the  teaching  of  this  article  concerning 
those  to  be  judged? 

a.  Christ  "shall  raise  up  all  the  dead."  It  is  inter- 
esting to  observe  that  in  a  former  draft  of  our  Confes- 
sion Melanchthon  had  written  "that  all  deceased  men 
shall  be  raised  up  with  the  same  body  in  which  they 
died."  This  he  changed  before  the  delivery  of  the 
Confession  to  the  present  reading.  It  reminds  us  of 
the  discussion  there  has  been  on  the  question,  whether 
we  should  speak  of  a  resurrection  of  the  body,  or  of  the 
flesh.  The  Apostles'  Creed,  in  the  original,  had  "flesh." 
Luther  translated  it  into  the  German  with  "Fleisch" 
(Auferstehung  des  Fleisches).  In  English  the  word 
"body"  (resurrection  of  the  body)  has  been  employed. 
The  Nicene  Creed  simply  speaks  of  the  "resurrection 
of  the  dead."  In  the  Apology  IMelanchthon  used  pre- 
cisely the  words  of  our  article:  "and  shall  raise  up  all 
the  dead."  In  his  Large  Catechism  (p.  446,  Book  of 
Concord)   Luther  writes  on  this  as  follows :    "But  the 


124  The  Augsburg  CoNr^iissioN. 

term  Auferstehung  des  Fleisches  (resurrection  of  the 
flesh)  here  employed  is  not  according  to  good  German 
idiom.  For  when  we  Germans  hear  the  word  Fleisch 
(flesh),  we  think  no  farther  than  the  shambles.  But  in 
good  German  idiom  we  would  say  Auferstehung  des 
Leihs,  or  Leichnahms  (resurrection  of  the  body).  Yet 
it  is  not  a  matter  of  much  moment,  if  we  only  under- 
stand the  words  in  their  true  sense."  But  what  is  their 
true  sense?  In  the  Form  of  Concord,  Part  Two,  Article 
II,  p.  548,  we  read:  ''In  the  article  of  resurrection, 
Scripture  testifies  that  it  is  precisely  the  substance  of 
this  our  flesh,  but  without  sin,  which  will  rise  again, 
and  that  in  eternal  life  we  will  have  and  retain  precisely 
this  soul,  but  without  sin."  In  Isaiah  26:19  we  read: 
"Thy  dead  men  shall  live,  together  with  my  dead  body 
shall  they  arise.  Awake  and  sing,  ye  that  dwell  in  the 
dust :  for  thy  dew  is  as  the  dew  of  herbs,  and  the  earth 
shall  cast  out  the  dust." 

b.  There  will  be  the  two  classes  :  ( i )  "the  godly  and 
elect"  to  whom  shall  be  given  "eternal  life  and  ever- 
lasting joys,"  and  (2)  the  "ungodly  men  and  the  devils" 
who  shall  be  condemned  and  tormented  without  end. 
This  stumbling  block  of  the  Universalists  and  the  Uni- 
tarians is  brought  to  an  unequivocal  expression,  because 
it  is  the  unmistakable  teaching  of  the  Scriptures  in  many 
places  ;    John  5  :  29 ;    Dan.   12:2;    Matt.  25  :  41-46. 

c.  "They  condemn  the  Anabaptists  who  think  that 
there  will  be  an  end  to  the  punishments  of  the  condemned 
men  and  devils."  That  in  the  end  all  will  be  saved  was 
taught  for  the  first  time  by  the  Church  father,  Origen. 
Some  Universalists  believe  that  there  will  be  in  the  future 
world  a  punishment  for  a  time,  but  that  it  will  be  a  mere 
process  of  purification  and  that  all  will  be  saved  in  the 
end.  Others  again  (Adventists  and  Russellites)  believe 
that  the  wicked  will  in  the  end  be  annihilated.  The 
word  "eternal,"  in  Matthew  25 :  41,  is  opposed  to  this. 

3.  What  is  the  attitude  of  this  article  to  Chiliasm? 

"They  condemn  also  others,  who  are  now  spreading 
certain  Jewish  opinions  that,  before  the  resurrection  of 


The  x\ugsburg  ConfkssioxNT.  125 

the  dead,  the  godly  shall  take  possession  of  the  kingdom 
of  the  world,  the  ungodly  being  everywhere  suppressed 
(exterminated)."  The  word  chiliasm  is  derived  from 
the  number  1000  in  Greek,  which  is  chilioi.  The  chiliasm 
here  rejected  is  that  interpretation  of  some  obscure  pas- 
sages of  Scripture  to  the  effect  that  Christ  shall  reign  on 
this  earth  in  a  visible  manner,  for  a  thousand  years,  over 
the  saints  of  the  first  resurrection,  and  that  this  visible 
and  earthly  kingdom  shall  destroy  the  enemies  of  God. 
This  strange  doctrine  which  grew  on  Jewish  soil  is  at  war 
with  other  clear  passages  of  Scripture,  with  the  analogy 
of  faith,  or  the  "proportion  of  faith,"  according  to 
Romans  12:6,  and  is,  therefore,  rejected  by  our  Con- 
fession. 

ARTICLE  EIGHTEEN. 
Of  Free  Wile. 

Of  the  Freedom  of  the  Will,  they  teach,  that  man's  will  has 
some  liberty  for  the  attainment  of  civil  righteousness,  and  for 
the  choice  of  things  subject  to  reason.  Nevertheless,  it  has  no 
power,  without  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  work  the  righteousness  of 
God,  that  is.  spiritual  righteousness;  since  the  natural  man  re- 
ceiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  (i  Cor.  2:14); 
but  this  righteousness  is  wrought  in  the  heart  when  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  received  through  the  Word.  These  things  are  said  in 
as  many  words  by  Augustine  in  his  Hypognosticon,  Book  HI : 
"We  grant  that  all  men  have  a  certain  freedom  of  will  in  judg- 
ing according  to  (natural)  reason;  not  such  freedom,  however, 
whereby  it  is  capable,  without  God,  either  to  begin,  or  much  less 
to  complete  aught  in  things  pertaining  to  God,  but  only  in  works 
of  this  life,  whether  good  or  evil.  'Good,'  I  call  those  works 
which  spring  from  the  good  in  Nature,  that  is,  to  have  a  will  to 
labor  in  the  field,  to  eat  and  drink,  to  have  a  friend,  to  clothe 
oneself,  to  build  a  house,  to  marry,  to  keep  cattle,  to  learn  divers 
useful  arts,  or  whatsoever  good  pertains  to  this  life,  none  of 
which  things  are  without  dependence  on  the  providence  of  God ; 
yea,  of  Him  and  through  Him  they  are  and  have  their  beginning. 
'Evil,'  I  call  such  works  as  to  have  a  will,  as  to  worship  an  idol, 
to  commit  murder,"  etc. 

They  condemn  the  Pelagians  and  others  who  teach  that,  with- 
out the  Holy  Ghost,  by  the  power  of  nature  alone,  we  are  able 
to  love  God  above  all  things ;  also  to  do  the  commandment  of 
God  as  touching  "the  substance  of  the  act." 

For,  although  nature  is  able  in  some  sort  to  do  the  outward 


126  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

work  (for  it  is  able  to  keep  the  hands  from  theft  and  murder), 
yet  it  cannot  work  the  inward  motions,  such  as  the  fear  of  God, 
trust  in  God,  chastity,  patience,  etc. 

I,  If  this  article  was  placed  in  the  Confession  for 
the  purpose  of  supplementing  Article  II,  on  Original 
Sin,  then  we  ask:  Where  is  the  connecting  link  be- 
tween these  two  articles? 

In  Article  II  we  learned  of  man's  total  depravity. 
That  naturally  raises  the  question  as  to  his  free  will 
after  the  fall.  We  want  to  know  in  particular  whether 
man  can  effect  his  salvation  in  his  own  natural  powers, 
or  whether  he  can  do  it  with  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  whether  it  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  altogether. 

Remark. — In  discussing  man's  free  will,  four  different  view- 
points can  be  taken,  says  the  Form  of  Concord  in  an  introduction 
to  Article  II.  We  can  ask  (i)  How  it  was  with  man's  free  will 
before  the  fall;  (2)  how  since  the  fall  and  before  regeneration; 
(3)  how  after  regeneration;  and,  finally,  (4)  how  after  the  resur- 
rection from  the  dead.  Here  in  this  article  the  discussion  is  ex- 
clusively from  the  second  viewpoint:  in  what  condition  is  man's 
free  imll  since  the  fall  and  before  regeneration? 

How  can  we  divide  this  article  for  a  profitable  discus- 
sion of  what  it  teaches  of  the  condition  of  man's  will 
since  the  fall  and  before  regeneration? 

The  doctrinal  contents  of  this  article  deal  with  two 
leading  questions:  (i)  What  can  the  unregenerated  do 
by  means  of  his  own  natural  powers?  (2)  What  is  he 
unable  to  do  before  he  is  regenerated?  Then  follows 
(3)  the  rejection  of  the  opponents. 

I.  WHAT  CAN  THE  UNREGENERATE  DO  BY 
MEANS  OF  HIS  OWN  NATURAL  POWERS? 

Our  article  says,  stating  the  condition  in  a  general 
way:  "That  man's  will  has  some  liberty  for  the  attain- 
ment of  civil  righteousness,  and  for  the  choice  of  things 
subject  to  reason."  Before  conversion,  then,  man  is 
free  in  external  things,  in  "outward  work,"  in  "things 
subject  to  reason."  Here  he  can  choose  between  alterna- 
tives. The  world  will  hold  him  responsible  for  his  acts. 
He  is  a  personality  which  cannot  be  without  a  free  will 


The:  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  127 

in  external  things  subject  to  reason.  But  this  article 
makes  a  distinction  between  things  exclusively  external 
and  things  that  are  external  in  the  moral  life  of  man: 

1.  Things  exclusively  external.  Text:  to  have  a 
will  to  ''labor  in  the  field,  to  eat  and  drink,  to  have  a 
friend,  to  clothe  oneself,  to  build  a  house,  to  marry,  to 
keep  cattle,  to  learn  divers  arts  or  whatsoever  good 
pertains  to  this  life."  Into  this  class,  says  Quenstedt, 
belong  also  such  things  "as  pertain  to  the  external 
government  and  discipline  of  the  Church,  such  as  to 
teach  and  hear  the  Word  of  God,  to  observe  certain 
ceremonies,  to  give  and  receive  the  Sacraments,  and 
similar  external  works,  affecting  the  external  senses. 

Remark. — Yet  do  not  overlook  the  word  "some''  ("man's  will 
has  some  liberty").  Even  in  these  altogether  external  things  man 
cannot  act  independent^  of  Divine  Providence.  We  read  in  the 
text :  "none  of  which  things  are  without  dependence  on  the  provi- 
dence of  God;  yea.  of  Him  and  through  Him  they  are  and  have 
their  beginning." 

2.  Things  that  are  external  in  the  moral  life  of  man. 

Our  article  mentions  ''civil  righteousness"  (German: 
"aeusserlich  ehrbar  zu  leben,"  translated:  outwardly  to 
lead  an  honest  life)  ;  it  also  speaks  of  ''evil  things," 
"works  as  to  have  a  will  to  worship  an  idol,  to  com- 
mit murder,"  etc.  Man  "is  able  to  keep  his  hands  from 
theft  and  murder."  In  these  things,  also,  which  are  not 
morally  indifferent,  even  the  unregenerated  man  has  the 
choice  of  alternatives.  Of  course,  if  we  say  that  a  man 
has  a  free  will  to  do  the  good,  we  must  be  careful  that 
by  "good"  we  do  not  understand  the  things  pertaining  to 
salvation.  It  is  only  a  "civil  righteousness."  In  the 
Apology  it  is  called  a  "righteousness  of  works,"  also  a 
"righteousness  of  the  flesh  which  the  carnal  nature,  i.  e., 
reason  by  itself  without  the  Holy  Ghost,  renders." 
Scripture  also  calls  it  a  "righteousness  of  the  Law," 
because  reason  and  observation  tell  man  that  there  is 
misery  in  the  way  of  the  transgressor.  This  civil  right- 
eousness can  even  go  together  with  an  hatred  of  Christ. 
Dr.  Baugher,  in  his  lecture  on  our  article  in  the  first 
series  of  the  Holman  Lectures  tells  a  significant  little 


128  The  Augsburg  Coni^kssion. 

story,  of  a  man  whose  life  was  so  exemplary  that  every- 
one wondered  wdiy  he  did  not  become  a  member  of  the 
Church.  He  seemed  to  be  such  in  every  thing  except  the 
profession.  And  when  that  man  lay  upon  his  dying  bed 
and  was  asked  by  the  ambassador  of  Christ,  under  whose 
ministrations  he  had  so  often  sat,  what  do  you  think  of 
Christ?  the  poor  man,  with  conscious  knowledge  of  his 
own  heart  and  with  rare  candor,  replied  :  ''I  hate  Him !" 
(Hoi.  Lect.,  First  Series,  pp.  711-712.) 

Remark. — But  here  also  (regarding  civil  righteousness  and 
what  is  the  opposite  of  it)  we  do  not  want  to  overlook  the  phrase 
"that  man's  will  has  some  liberty"  (Latin:  "aliquam  libertatem ;" 
German,  "etlichermassen")  and  that  he  has  only  a  "certain  free- 
dom." As  reason  is  given  in  the  Apology  that  "the  power  of  con- 
cupiscence is  such  that  men  more  frequently  obey  evil  dispositions 
than  sound  judgment.  And  the  devil,  who  is  efficacious  in  the 
godless,  as  Paul  says  (Eph.  2:2),  does  not  cease  to  incite  this 
feeble  nature  to  various  offences."  (Book  of  Concord,  p.  230) 
And  the  phrases  "some  liberty,"  "some  freedom"  have  reference 
also  to  the  "evil"  things.  God  does  not  always  permit  an  evil  in- 
tention to  become  a  deed,  especially  in  cases  where  it  would 
thwart  the  plans  of  His  government.  Illustrations  are :  Abime- 
lech  (Gen.  20:6),  Laban   (Gen.  31:24),  Balaam  (Num.  22:  12). 

II.  WHAT  IS  MAN  UNABLE  TO  DO  BEFORE 
HE  IS  REGENERATED? 

In  one  respect  the  will  of  man  after  the  fall  and  before 
regeneration  is  not  free.  We  read  in  our  article: 
"Nevertheless,  it  has  no  power,  without  the  Holy  Ghost, 
to  work  the  righteousness  of  God,  that  is  spiritual  right- 
eousness, since  the  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things 
of  the  Spirit  of  God  (i  Cor.  2:  14)  ;  but  this  righteous- 
ness is  wrought  in  the  heart  when  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
received  through  the  Word."  ''Nature  .  .  .  cannot 
work  the  inward  motions,  such  as  the  fear  of  God,  trust 
in  God,  chastity,  patience,"  etc. 

I.  Do  these  v/ords  from  the  pen  of  Melanchthon 
agree  with  Luther's  interpretation  of  the  third  article 
of  the  Apostles'  Creed?  The  words  of  the  Catechism 
are:  ''I  believe  that  I  cannot  by  my  own  reason  and 
strength  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  my  Lord,  or  come  to 
Him,  but  the  Holy  Ghost  has  called  me  by  the  Gospel, 


Th^:  Augsburg  Coni^kssion.  129 

enlightened  me  with  His  gifts,  sanctified  and  kept  me 
in  the  true  faith,"  etc.  Here  man's  conversion  appears 
exclusively  as  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Does  not 
this  eighteenth  article  of  our  Confession  admit  more 
with  respect  to  man's  part  in  the  process  of  conversion? 
When  this  article  says  that  man's  will  has  no  power 
ivithout  the  Holy  Ghost  does  not  that  mean:  the  will 
has  such  power  zvith  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  The  German  text 
reads :  ''Aber  ohne  Gnad,  Hilfe  und  Wirkung  des 
Heiligen  Geistes,"  etc. ;  i.  e.,  translated  into  English : 
''Without  grace,  help  and  Wirkung  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
man  cannot  become  pleasing  before  God."  How  are  we 
to  harmonize  this  language  with  the  words  of  Luther? 

a.  We  answer  first:  This  Article  XVHI  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  also  teaches  unmistakably  that 
man's  conversion  is  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit :  "This 
righteousness  is  wrought  in  the  heart  when  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  received  through  the  Word."  German  :  "Denn 
solches  geschieht  durch  den  heiligen  Geist."  Latin: 
"Sed  haec  fit  in  cordibus." 

b.  But  by  so  teaching  our  article  does,  of  course,  not 
deny  that  it  is  and  must  be  man's  own  will  which  is 
subjected  to  the  divine  influences,  and  that  the  decision 
in  conversion  is  through  (not  by  the  power  of)  this  will. 

c.  The  word  "help,"  (Hilfe)  in  the  German  text, 
will  impress  us  differently  when  we  keep  in  mind  that 
the  three  words  there  employed  (Gnad,  Hilfe  und 
Wirkung)  present  a  gradation,  a  climax  from  the  general 
to  the  specific.  First  grace  in  general ;  then  help,  assist- 
ance, which  already  is  more  specific ;  finally  "Wirkung," 
which  is  difficult  to  translate  into  English  with  the  full 
meaning  of  the  German.  The  Lexicon  gives  "operation," 
but  it  means  more.  Wirkung  is  not  merely  Wirken, 
operation;  it  means  the  result  of  an  operation,  some- 
thing that  has  been  effected,  Bewirktes.  So  we  have  in 
those  three  words  (grace,  help,  Wirkung)  a  gradation, 
and  it  is  the  last  word  that  receives  the  emphasis.  The 
fact  remains  that  the  will  of  the  natural  man  is  unable 
to  effect  spiritual  righteousness.  This  is  done  by  a 
decisive  influence  (Wirkung)  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


130  The  x\ugsburg  Con:^ession. 

2.  Does  the  Form  of  Concord  (Article  II)  go  materi- 
ally beyond  the  Augustana  in  the  doctrine  of  Free- 
Will?  We  know  that  it  is  more  outspoken,  and  that 
it  takes  pains  in  guarding  against  misinterpretations  of 
this  doctrine,  which  is  to  be  explained  by  the  experiences 
of  Lutheranism  in  the  synergistic  controversies  in  the 
post-Reformation  age,  but  does  the  Form  of  Concord 
offer  a  nezv  doctrine f 

a.  The  Form  of  Concord  teaches  that  there  are  only 
two  efficient  causes  of  conversion,  namely,  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  the  Word  (580,  12).  Man's  will  must  not  be 
co-ordinated  as  a  third  cause  (569,  90),  as  was  done  by 
Melanchthon  in  his  Examen  Ordinandorum.  Conver- 
sion, faith  in  Christ,  regeneration,  renewal  belong  alone 
to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  Word  of  God  as  the  instru- 
ment, ''not  to  the  human  powers  of  the  natural  free  will, 
either  entirely,  or  half,  or  the  least  or  most  inconsiderable 
part"  (557,  25).  This  is  not  irreconcilable  with  Article 
XVHI  of  our  Confession. 

b.  The  Form  of  Concord,  quoting  Luther,  says  "that 
man's  will  is  in  his  conversion  purely  passive"  (499,  18; 
569,  89).  Even  this  phrase  is  not  against  the  doctrine 
of  our  article.  H  the  spiritual  righteousness  is  "wrought 
in  our  heart,"  and  if  it  is  a  "Wirkung"  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  who  "renews  and  purifies  us,"  and  if  it  is  God 
who  "imparts  life  and  motion"  (Melanchthon's  Schoha 
on  Colossians),  then  man's  will  is  passive  in  the  act  of 
conversion. 

c.  The  Form  of  Concord  approves  of  Luther's  strong 
and  drastic  expressions  that  in  conversion  "man  is  like 
a  pillar  of  salt,  like  Lot's  wife,  yea,  like  a  log  and  a  stone, 
like  a  lifeless  statue"  (556,  20).  This  has  often  given 
offence,  but  there  was  no  intention  with  these  expres- 
sions to  say  that  in  conversion  God  does  not  act  with 
man  as  with  a  personal  being.  The  Form  of  Concord 
says  again :  "God  has  ...  a  way  of  working  in  a  man, 
as  in  a  rational  creature,  quite  different  from  His  way 
of  working  in  another  creature  that  is  irrational  or  is  a 
stone  and  block"  (564,  62).  Therefore  the  Holy  Ghost 
"effects  conversion,  not  without  means,  but  uses  for  this 


Thi:  Augsburg  Confession.  131 

purpose  the  preaching  and  hearing  of  God's  Word, 
Rom.  1 :  16;  10:  17"  (497,  4)-  It  is  "through  the  heard 
Word"  that  God's  vSpirit  "lays  hold  upon  man's  will" 
(500,  20).  God  draws  man  "in  such  a  way  that  his 
understanding,  in  place  of  darkened,  becomes  enlight- 
ened, and  his  will,  in  place  of  perverse,  becomes 
obedient"  (564,  60).  If  man  is,  with  the  words  of 
Luther,  compared  to  a  "pillar  of  salt,"  to  "a  log  and  a 
stone,"  then  such  is  a  description  of  the  spiritual  death 
in  which  grace  finds  him :  "For  man  neither  sees  nor 
perceives  the  fierce  and  terrible  wrath  of  God  on  account 
of  his  sin  and  death,  but  he  continues  even  knowingly 
and  willingly  in  his  security  .  .  .  and  no  prayers,  no 
supplications,  no  admonitions,  yea,  also  no  threats,  no 
reprimands  are  of  any  avail ;  yea,  all  teaching  and  preach- 
ing are  lost  upon  him,  until  he  is  enlightened,  converted 
and  regenerated  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  (556,  21).  But  while 
man  can  "of  himself  and  of  his  own  natural  powers"  con- 
tribute to  his  own  conversion  or  regeneration  "as  little  as 
a  stone  or  a  block  of  clay"  (556,  24),  yet  God's  work  in 
man  is  "not  as  a  statue  is  cut  in  a  stone  or  a  seal  impressed 
into  wax,  which  knows  nothing  of  it"  (569,  89),  but  it  is 
through  a  "drawing  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  God  changes 
stubborn  and  unwilling  into  willing  men"  (569,  88). 
This  is  not  opposed  to  the  teaching  of  Article  XVIII 
in  the  Confession.  Even  the  expression:  "It  (man's 
will)  has  no  power,  without  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  work 
the  righteousness  of  God,"  etc.  (at  the  beginning  of 
Article  XVIII)  has  its  parallels  in  the  Form  of  Con- 
cord, for  instance,  when  it  says,  498,  6:  "For,  without 
His  grace,  and  if  He  do  not  grant  the  increase,  our 
willing  and  running,  our  planting  and  watering,  all  are 
nothing,  as  Christ  says  (John  15:5):  'Without  me  ye 
can  do  nothing.'  "* 


*Passages  of  Scripture  confirming  our  article  are  these:  i  Cor.  2:  14: 
But  the  natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God:  for 
they  are  foolishness  unto  him;  neither  can  he  know  them,  because  they 
are  spiritually  discerned.  John  6:  44:  No  man  can  come  unto  me  except 
the  father  which  hath  sent  me  draw  him.  i  Cor.  12:  3:  No  man  can  say 
that  Jesus  is  the  Lord,  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Rom.  7:  18:  For  I  know 
that  in  me  (that  is  in  my  flesh)  dwelleth  no  good  thing:  for  to  will  is 
present  with  me;  etc.     Also,  2  Cor.  3:5;  Phil.  2:  13. 


132  The:  Augsburg  Confe:ssion. 

So  our  conclusion  is  that  in  the  Form  of  Concord 
(Article  II)  there  is  no  doctrine  of  Free  Will  materially 
different  from  that  in  Article  XVIII  of  the  Confession. 
It  is  the  original  Lutheran  doctrine  of  God  as  the  sole 
cause  of  man's  conversion,  fortified,  of  course,  against 
the  objections  of  Melanchthon's  later  views.  It  may 
be  admitted  that  already  before  1530  (after  the  contro- 
versy of  Luther  with  Erasmus,  1525)  Melanchthon  began 
to  develop  in  the  direction  of  Synergism,  but  the  specifi- 
cally synergistic  doctrine  of  the  three  concurring  causes 
in  conversion  (Word,  Holy  Spirit  and  man's  will  assent- 
ing to  and  not  resisting)  was  not  yet  put  into  the 
Confession  at  the  time  of  its  delivery  at  Augsburg. 

III.  WHO  ARE  THE  OPPONENTS  OF  THIS 
ARTICLE? 

Our  text  reads:  "They  (the  Lutheran  churches)  con- 
demn the  Pelagians  and  others  who  teach  that,  without 
the  Holy  Ghost,  by  the  power  of  nature  alone,  we  are 
able  to  love  God  above  all  things ;  also  to  do  the  com- 
mandments of  God  as  touching  'the  substance  of  the  act.'  " 

1.  "The  Pelagians."  We  read  of  them  in  Article  II 
of  Original  Sin.  As  they  believe  that  man  is  born  with- 
out sin  so  they  also  believe  that  man's  will  is  free  in  spirit- 
ual things  and  that  he,  in  case  that  he  should  leave  God, 
could  turn  to  Him  again  out  of  his  own  spiritual  powers. 
There  is  no  sect  to-day  known  under  the  name  of  Pela- 
gians, but  Pelagianism  permeates  all  churches  that  are 
Socinian  or  rationalistic  in  character.  The  Unitarians, 
the  Independent  Protestants  of  Cincinnati,  etc.,  the 
Universalists,  the  Campbellites,  the  Swedenborgians,  are 
Pelagian  in  doctrine.  And  the  ideas  of  Pelagianism 
are  being  disseminated  in  the  literature  of  our  day  and 
in  the  public  institutions  of  learning.  Pelagianism  is  in 
a  special  sense  the  religion  of  the  natural  man. 

2.  "The  Pelagians  and  others."  The  Romanists  were 
Semi-pelagians,  which  means  that  they  believe  man, 
endowed  with  a  free  will  in  spiritual  things,  to  be  the 
principal  factor  in  the  process  of  conversion,  the  Holy 


The  Augsburg  Coni^kssiox.  133 

Spirit  merely  aiding.  This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  up  to  our  day.  So  the  Greek  Catholic 
Church  also  teaches.  In  the  Reformed  Church,  as  a 
reaction  against  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  predestina- 
tion, Arminianism  arose,  which,  after  the  death  of  its 
founder,  became  practically  Semi-pelagianism.  The 
Free- Will  Baptists  are  Arminianistic  in  principle.  The 
Methodists  seem  to  take  a  different  position  (according 
to  Article  VIII  of  their  Articles  of  Faith),  but  their 
revival  meetings  show  that  in  practice  they  are  Armin- 
ians.  The  same  is  to  be  said  of  the  Evangelical  Asso- 
ciation, the  Quakers,  the  Seventh  Day  Adventists. 

Remark. — In  the  Lutheran  Church,  Melanchthon,  the  writer  of 
the  Augsburg  Confession  himself,  at  a  later  time,  began  to  em- 
phasize more  than  he  first  had  done,  man's  will  as  a  factor  in  the 
process  of  conversion.  He  gave  some  expression  to  it  in  his  so- 
called  altered  edition  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  of  1540,  as  he 
had  already  done  in  a  new  edition  of  his  Loci.  But  this  "s3'ner- 
gism,"  as  it  was  styled,  did  not  receive  an  abiding  place  in  the 
Lutheran  Church.  It  was  rejected  in  Article  II  of  the  Form  of 
Concord.  See  pp.  498  (line  11)  and  567  (line  ']']').  What  is  the 
difference  between  Roman  Semi-pelagianism  and  Melanchthonian 
Synergism?  The  answer  to  tnis  question  cannot  be  made  clearer 
than  by  the  following  t  vo  brief  paragraphs  in  the  first  part  of  the 
Form  of  Concord:  i.  "We  reject  also  the  enor  of  the  Semi-pela- 
gians, who  teach  that  man,  by  his  own  powers,  can  make  a  begin- 
ning of  his  conversion,  but  without  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Ghost  can- 
not complete  it."  2.  "Also  that  when  it  is  taught  that,  although 
man  by  his  free  will  before  regeneration,  is  too  weak  to  make  a 
beginning,  and  by  his  own  powers,  to  turn  itself  to  God,  and  in 
heart  to  be  obedient  to  God;  yet,  if  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Word,  has  made  a  beginning,  and  offered  therein  His 
grace,  then  the  will  of  man,  from  its  own  natural  powers,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  although  feebly,  can  add,  help  and  co-operate  there- 
with, can  qualify  and  prepare  itself  for  grace,  and  embrace  and 
accept  it,  and  believe  the  Gospel."  The  concessions  to  man's  free 
will,  in  this  second  paragraph,  seem  to  be  insignificant.  Yet  they 
have  introduced  a  type  of  preaching  which  is  at  variance  with  the 
spirit  of  Lutheranism.     A  little  leaven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump. 

ARTICLE  NINETEEN. 

The:  Cause;  of  Sin. 

Of  the  Cause  of  Sin,  they  teach,  that  although  God  doth 
create  and  preserve  nature,  yet  the  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of 


134  'I'he  Augsburg  CoNi^itssioN.' 

the  wicked,  that  is,  of  the  devil  and  imgodl}^  men ;  which  will, 
unaided  of  God.  turns  itself  from  God,  as  Christ  says  (John 
8:44)  :    "When  he  speaketh  a  lie,  he  speaketh  of  his  own." 

1.  Why  was  this  article  put  into  the  Confession? 

Dr.  Eck  had  among  his  charges  one  in  which  he 
accused  the  Lutherans  of  making  God  the  cause  of 
sin.  This  was  based  on  some  expressions  bordering 
on  absolute  predestination,  which  Luther  had  used  in 
his  controversy  with  Erasmus.  The  natural  place  to 
treat  of  this  matter  is  here,  following  the  article  of 
Free  Will.  From  the  assertion  that  man  has  no  free 
will  in  spiritual  things,  as  it  was  made  in  Article  XVIH, 
it  could  easily  be  inferred  that  God  has  created  him  in 
such  a  condition.  And  this  gives  us  the  connecting  link 
between  this  nineteenth  article  and  Article  II  of  Original 
Sin.  For  this  article  also  is  to  supplement  Article  II. 
We  discover  the  theme  of  this  article  by  asking  the 
following  question : 

2.  If  original  sin  "is  truly  sin,  even  nov^^  condemn- 
ing and  bringing  eternal  death,"  and  if  "all  men   .    .    . 
are  born  with"  sin,  must  sin  then  not  be  charged  to 
the  Creator? 

No.  For  God  did  not  create  man  with  sin.  This 
Manichean  doctrine  was  already  condemned  in  Article 
II,  because  it  dates  original  sin  not  from  man's  creation, 
but  from  "the  fall  of  Adam."  Sin  has  come  in  with 
the  fall.  It  does  therefore  not  belong  to  the  substance 
of  human  nature.  This  Manichean  error,  to  which  even 
the  strict  Lutheran  Matthias  Flacius  fell  a  victim,  is 
dealt  with  in  Article  I  of  the  Form  of  Concord.  The 
following  passages  of  Scripture  taken  together  teach  that 
man  was  not  created  sinful :  i  John  1:5:  God  is  light, 
and  in  Him  is  no  darkness  at  all.  Job.  10:8:  Thine 
hands  have  made  me  and  fashioned  me  together  round 
about.  Gen.  i :  27 :  So  God  created  man  in  His  own 
image,  in  the  image  of  God  created  He  him.  Man's 
nature  is  not  sin,  but  sinful.  "Much  as  one  may  suffer 
from  diphtheria  or  typhoid  fever,  no  one  can  be  said  to 
be  either  of  these  diseases"    (Dr.   Jacobs).     We  must 


Thi:  Augsburg  Confession.  135 

not    identify    nature    with    the    vicious    quality    of    sin. 
Sin  is  Hke  the  mildew  on  bread. 

3.  But  why  does  God  preserve  sinful  nature? 

Does  not  that  show  that  He  wills  the  existence  of  sin? 
It  is  not  sin  that  God  preserves  or  intends  to  preserve, 
but  human  nature,  the  person.  It  is  possible  for  the  sin- 
ner to  be  cleansed  of  his  sin.  So,  also,  regarding  man's 
creation,  there  was  the  possibility  of  his  fall.  But  that 
did  not  keep  God  from  creating  man.  The  possibility 
of  man's  falling  into  sin  was  included  in  God's  plan  of 
redemption.  This  explains  also  His  preservation  of 
sinful  humanity.  If  the  sinner  is  the  object  of  God's 
preservation,  and  if,  according  to  our  old  dogmaticians, 
we  can  even  speak  of  a  certain  concurrence  of  God 
regarding  the  sinful  acts  of  men,  (compare  Article 
XVIII,  exposition  I,  2,  note,  at  the  close)  even  this 
does  not  make  God  the  cause  of  sin.  ''If  the  murderer 
raises  his  hand,  then  the  strength  is  from  God,  but  in 
the  sin  itself  God  has  no  part."  Compare  here  what  our 
dogmaticians  taught  concerning  "Permission,"  "Hin- 
drance," "Direction,"  "Determinism." 

4.  What  is  the  cause  of  sin? 

Our  article  says :  "The  cause  of  sin  is  the  will  of  the 
wicked,  that  is,  the  devil  and  ungodly  men."  The  possi- 
bility of  sinning  was  in  the  nature  of  the  will,  in  the  fact 
that  man  is  a  personality.  If  God  had  created  animals, 
plants  or  minerals  instead  of  man,  there  would  have 
been  no  possibility  of  a  fall.  But  He  created  angels  and 
man,  v^^ho  could  use  their  will  in  choosing  the  wrong. 

5.  How  did  the  fall  of  man  take  place? 

a.  The  will  of  the  devil  is  mentioned  first.  This  is 
the  first  cause  of  sin.  The  temptation  by  the  devil 
accounts  for  the  fall  of  man  and  for  the  condition  of 
his  will  which  becomes,  in  a  secondary  way,  the  cause 
uf  actual  sins. 

1).  But  how  does  the  choice  of  sin  on  the  part  of  man 
take    place?      Here    this    article    has    a    phrase    which 


136  The  Augsburg  Coni^ession. 

is  not  easy  to  understand,  namely :  'Vhich  will,  unaided 
of  God,  turneth  itself  from  God."  This  means  that  God 
did  not  put  anything  into  the  will  that  in  the  moment  of 
temptation  caused  the  decision  to  fall  in  the  fatal  direc- 
tion. The  difficulty  is  not  so  much  with  the  Latin  text, 
of  which  our  English  is  a  translation,  as  it  is  with  the 
German  text,  which  reads :  ''So  Gott  die  Hand  abgetan," 
which  in  English  is :  when  God  withdrew  His  hand,  or, 
''which,  as  scon  as  divine  aid  is  withdrawn,  turneth  from 
God  unto  evil."  The  meaning  seems  to  be  that  in  man's 
temptation  there  are  moments  "when  God  withdraws  His 
hand,"  when  man  is  left  to  decide  for  himself.  The 
meaning  is,  that  God  does  not  decide  for  man,  and  does 
not  annihilate  the  tempter  before  he  approaches.  This 
has  the  confirmation  of  Scripture,  in  2  Chron.  32:31, 
where  we  read  of  Hezekiah :  ''God  left  him  to  try  him 
that  he  might  know  all  that  was  in  his  heart."  So  the 
German  text  supplements  the  Latin  in  a  very  suggestive 
manner.  The  Latin,  of  which  our  English  text  is  a 
translation,  makes  the  negative  statement,  that  God  in  no 
wise  aids  in  the  sinful  act ;  the  German  adds  the  thought, 
that  this  should  not  be  interpreted  as  God  exempting 
man  from  the  test  in  the  smelting-furnace  of  temptation. 

ARTICLE  TWENTY. 
Of  Good  Works. 

Our  teachers  are  falsely  accused  of  forbidding  Good  Works. 
For  their  published  writings  on  the  Ten  Commandments,  and 
others  of  like  import,  .bear  witness  that  they  have  taught  to 
good  purpose  concerning  all  estates  and  duties  of  life,  as  to 
what  estates  of  life  and  what  works  in  every  calling  be  pleas- 
ing to  God.  Concerning  these  things  preachers  heretofore 
taught  but  little,  and  urged  only  childish  and  needless  works, 
as  particular  holydays,  particular  fasts,  brotherhoods,  pilgrim- 
ages, services  in  honor  of  saints,  the  use  of  rosaries,  monasti- 
cism.  and  such  like.  Since  our  adversaries  have  been  admon- 
ished of  these  things  they  are  now  unlearning  them,  and  do 
not  preach  these  unprofitable  works  as  heretofore.  Besides 
they  begin  to  mention  faith,  of  which  there  was  heretofore 
marvelous  silence.  They  teach  that  we  are  justified  not  by 
works  only,  but  they  conjoin  faith  and  works,  and  say  that  we 
are  justified  by  faith  and  works.     This  doctrine  is  more  toler- 


The  Augsburg  Confession.  137 

able  than  the  former  one,  and  can  afford  more  consolation 
than  their  old  doctrine. 

Forasmuch,  therefore,  as  the  doctrine  concerning  faith,  which 
ought  to  be  the  chief  one  in  the  Church,  has  lain  so  long 
unknown,  as  all  must  needs  grant  that  there  was  the  deepest 
silence  in  their  sermons  concerning  the  righteousness  of  faith, 
while  onh'  the  doctrine  of  works  was  treated  in  the  churches, 
our  teachers  have  instructed  the  churches  concerning  faith  as 
follows : 

First,  that  our  works  cannot  reconcile  God  or  merit  for- 
giveness of  sins,  grace  and  justification,  but  that  we  obtain  this 
only  by  faith,  when  we  believe  that  we  are  received  into  favor 
for  Christ's  sake,  who  alone  has  been  set  forth  the  Mediator 
and  Propitiation  [i  Tim.  2:5],  in  order  that  the  Father  may 
be  reconciled  through  Him.  Whoever,  therefore,  trusts  that 
by  works  he  merits  grace,  despises  the  merit  and  grace  of 
Christ,  and  seeks  a  way  to  God  without  Christ,  by  human 
strength,  although  Christ  has  said  of  Himself:  "I  am  the 
Way,  the  Truth  and  the  Life"  [John  14:  6]. 

This  doctrine  concerning  faith  is  everywhere  treated  by  Paul 
[Eph.  2:8]:  "By  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith ;  and  that 
not  of  yourselves;    it  is  the  gift  of  God,  not  of  works,"  etc. 

And  lest  anyone  should  craftily  say  that  a  new  interpretation 
of  Paul  has  been  devised  by  us,  this  entire  matter  is  sup- 
ported by  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers.  For  Augustine,  in 
many  volumes,  defends  grace  and  the  righteousness  of  faith, 
over  against  the  merits  of  works.  And  Ambrose,  in  his  De 
Vocationc  Gentium,  and  elsewhere,  teaches  to  like  effect.  For 
in  his  De  Vocatione  Gentium  he  says  as  follows:  "Redemption 
by  the  Blood  of  Christ  w^ould  become  of  little  value,  neither 
would  the  pre-eminence  of  man's  works  be  superseded  by  the 
mercy  of  God,  if  justification,  which  is  wrought  through  grace, 
were  due  to  the  merits  going  before,  so  as  to  be,  not  the  free 
gift  of  a  donor,  but  the  reward  due  to  the  laborer." 

But.  although  this  doctrine  is  despised  by  the  inexperienced, 
nevertheless  God-fearing  and  anxious  consciences  find  by  experi- 
ence that  it  brings  the  greatest  consolation,  because  consciences 
cannot  be  pacified  through  any  works,  but  only  by  faith,  when 
they  are  sure  that,  for  Christ's  sake,  they  have  a  gracious  God. 
As  Paul  teaches  [Rom.  5:1]:  "Being  justified  by  faith,  we 
have  peace  with  God."  This  whole  doctrine  is  to  be  referred 
to  that  conflict  of  the  terrified  conscience ;  neither  can  it  be 
understood  apart  from  that  conflict.  Therefore  inexperienced 
and  profane  men  judge  ill  concerning  this  matter,  who  dream 
that  Christian  righteousness  is  nothing  but  the  civil  righteous- 
ness of  natural  reason. 

Heretofore  consciences  were  plagued  with  the  doctrine  of 
works,  nor  did  they  hear  any  consolation  from  the  Gospel. 
Some  persons  were  driven  by  conscience  into  the  desert,  into 
monasteries,   hoping   there   to   merit  grace   by   a  monastic  life. 


138  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

Some  also  devised  other  works  whereby  to  merit  grace  and 
make  satisfaction  for  sins.  There  was  very  great  need  to 
treat  of  and  renew  this  doctrine  of  faith  in  Christ,  to  the  end 
that  anxious  consciences  should  not  be  without  consolation, 
but  that  they  might  know  that  grace  and  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  justification  are  apprehended  by  faith  in  Christ. 

Men  are  also  admonished  that  here  the  term  "faith"  doth 
not  signify  merely  the  knowledge  of  the  history,  such  as  is  in 
the  ungodly  and  in  the  devil,  but  signifies  a  faith  which  believes, 
not  merely  the  history,  but  also  the  effect  of  the  history,  namely, 
this  article  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  to  wit,  that  we  have 
grace,  righteousness,  and  forgiveness  of  sins,  through  Christ. 

Now  he  that  knoweth  that  he  has  a  Father  reconciled  to 
him  through  Christ,  since  he  truly  knows  God,  knows  also 
that  God  careth  for  him,  and  calls  upon  God ;  in  a  word,  he 
is  not  without  God,  as  the  heathen.  For  devils  and  the  un- 
godly are  not  able  to  believe  this  article  of  the  forgiveness  of 
sins.  Hence,  they  hate  God  as  an  enemy;  call  not  upon  Him; 
and  expect  no  good  from  Him.  Augustine  also  admonishes 
his  readers  concerning  the  word  "faith,"  and  teaches  that  the 
term  "faith"  is  accepted  in  the  Scriptures,  not  for  knowledge 
such  as  is  in  the  ungodl3^  but  for  confidence  which  consoles 
and  encourages  the  terrified  mind. 

Furthermore,  it  is  taught  on  our  part,  that  it  is  necessary  to 
do  good  works,  not  that  we  should  trust  to  merit  grace  by 
them,  but  ,because  it  is  the  will  of  God.  It  is  only  by  faith 
that  forgiveness  of  sins  and  grace  are  apprehended.  And 
because  through  faith  the  Holy  Ghost  is  received,  hearts  are 
renewed  and  endowed  with  new  affections,  so  as  to  be  able  to 
bring  forth  good  works.  For  Ambrose  says :  "Faith  is  the 
mother  of  a  good  will  and  right  doing,"  For  man's  powers 
without  the  Holy  Ghost  are  full  of  ungodly  affections,  and 
are  too  weak  to  do  works  which  are  good  in  God's  sight.  Be- 
sides, they  are  in  the  power  of  the  devil,  who  impels  men  to 
divers  sins,  to  ungodly  opinions,  to  open  crimes.  This  we 
may  see  in  the  philosophers,  who,  although  they  endeavored 
to  live  an  honest  life,  could  not  succeed,  but  were  defiled  with 
many  open  crimes.  Such  is  the  feebleness  of  man,  when  he 
is  without  faith  and  without  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  governs  him- 
self only  by  human  strength. 

Hence  it  may  be  readily  seen  that  this  doctrine  is  not  to  be 
charged  with  prohibiting  good  works,  but  rather  the  more  to 
be  commended,  because  it  shows  how  we  are  enabled  to  do 
good  works.  For  without  faith,  human  nature  can  in  no  wise 
do  the  works  of  the  First  or  of  the  Second  Commandment. 
Without  faith,  it  does  not  call  upon  God,  nor  expect  anything 
from  Him,  nor  bear  the  cross;  but  seeks  and  trusts  in  man's 
help.  And  thus,  when  there  is  no  faith  and  trust  in  God,  all 
manner  of  lusts  and  human  devices  rule  in  the  heart.     Where- 


The:  Augsburg  Con:pession.  139 

fore  Christ  said  [John  15  :  5]  :    "Without  me  ye  can  do  nothing," 
and  the  Church  sings : 

"Without  Thy  power  divine 
In  man  there  nothing  is, 
Naught  but  what  is  harmful." 

This  article  is  a  further  exposition  of  Articles  IV  and 
VI,  here  added  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  the  persistent 
objection  of  the  Romanists,  that  the  doctrine  of  Justifica- 
tion quenches  the  striving  after  righteousness  of  life. 
We  shall  give  this  longest  of  all  articles  of  the  first  part 
of  our  Confession  in  the  form  of  an  outline  as  we  find 
it  in  a  little  book  on  the  Augsburg  Confession  wTitten  in 
German  for  laymen,  by  a  layman  (a  major  of  a  city  in 
Germany),  who  was  so  modest  that  he  did  not  even  give 
his  name.  This  Httle  book  of  104  pages  was  pubHshed 
in  Heidelberg  (Germany)  by  Carl  Winter's  Univer- 
sitaetsbuchhandlung.     The  outline  is  as  follows : 

I.  The  accusation  that  the  doctrine  of  justification 
by  faith  kills  the  striving  after  righteousness  of  life  is 
false,  because  it  is  manifest  that  the  writings  of  Luther 
and  his  brethren  have  given  a  new  impulse  even  to  the 
preaching  of  the  opponents  who  now  lay  more  emphasis 
upon  the  things  which  the  Word  of  God  demands  con- 
cerning the  daily  life  of  the  Christian,  in  place  of  the 
unnecessary  things  that  were  preached  before  (on  holy- 
days,  fasts,  pilgrimages,  the  use  of  rosaries,  etc.) 

II.  The  Roman  doctrine  concerning  works  is  false 
and  harmful  for  the  following  four  reasons: 

1.  It  casts  contempt  upon  Christ,  and  man  invents  a 
way  of  his  own  for  salvation,  notwithstanding  Christ  has 
said:    I  am  the  way  (John  14:6). 

2.  It  leaves  the  troubled  conscience  without  comfort 
and  peace  ("Heretofore  consciences  were  plagued  with 
the  doctrine  of  works,"  etc. 

3.  It  leaves  out  of  consideration  that  zvithout  faith  and 
outside  of  Christ  and  zvithout  the  Holy  Ghost,  we  are  too 
zveak  to  do  works  pleasing  to  God:  "Without  me  ye  can 
do  nothing"  (John  15:5). 


140  The;  Augsburg  Confe:ssion. 

4.  hi  connection  zvith  it  is  held  that  faith  signifies 
"merely  the  knowledge  of  the  history,  such  as  it  is  in 
the  ungodly  and  the  devil." 

III.  Over  against  these  negative  statements  our 
article  asserts  in  a  more  positive  way  the  folloiving 
three  things: 

1.  This  doctrine  is  divinely  true,  because 

(a)  It  is  taught  in  the  Gospel,  especially  by  Paul.  Eph. 
2:8. 

(b)  It  is  the  old  doctrine  ''supported  by  the  testimonies 
of  the  fathers."    Augustine  and  Ambrose  are  quoted. 

2.  This  doctrine  is  necessary,  because 

(a)  It  represents  the  most  fundamental  thing  in  Chris- 
tianity ; 

(b)  It  gives  peace  to  the  timid  and  terrified  consciences 
(''But  although  this  doctrine  is  despised  by  the  inexperi- 
enced, nevertheless,"  etc.)  ; 

(c)  It  does  not  lose  sight  of  the  essence  of  faith,  v^hich 
is  confidence  in  God,  and  the  trust  that  in  Christ  we  have 
the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

3.  This  is  a  safe  doctrine, 

(a)  Because  on  the  one  hand  it  teaches  us  about  real 
good  works,  not  that  we  should  put  our  trust  in  them  and 
try  to  merit  grace,  hut  that  by  doing  them  we  should 
honor  and  glorify  God ; 

(b)  Because,  on  the  other  hand,  we  are  taught  that 
God  not  only  wants  such  works,  hut  also  that  through 
faith  He  gives  us  the  Holy  Ghost  who  endows  us  with 
strength  to  lead  a  holy  life. 

Conclusion:  For  all  these  reasons  the  opponents  ought 
to  praise  this  doctrine  of  faith  and  should  not  undertake 
to  persecute  those  who  have  accepted  it. 

ARTICLE  TWENTY-ONE. 

Of  thk  Worship  of  Saints. 

Of  the  Worship  of  Saints,  they  teach,  that  the  memory  of 
saints  may  be  set  before  us,  that  we  may  follow  their  faith  and 
good  works,  according  to  our  calling,  as  the  Emperor  may  follow 
the  example  of  David  in  making  war  to  drive  away  the  Turk 


The  Augsburg  Con:^ession.  141 

from  his  country.  For  both  are  kings.  But  the  Scripture 
teaches  not  the  invocation  of  saints,  or  to  ask  help  of  saints, 
since  it  sets  before  us  Christ,  as  the  only  Mediator,  Propitiation, 
High-Priest  and  Intercessor.  He  is  to  be  prayed  to,  and  hath 
promised  that  He  will  hear  our  prayer;  and  this  worship  He 
approves  above  all  to  wit,  that  in  all  afflictions  He  be  called 
upon  (i  John  2:1):  "li  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  Advocate 
with  the  Father,"  etc. 

The  author  of  this  book  delivered  the  Hohiian  lecture 
in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Gettysburg,  Pa.,  in  the 
spring  of  1909,  on  this  article,  and  he  takes  the  liberty 
of  referring  the  reader,  who  is  looking  for  an  extensive 
treatment  of  this  article,  to  that  lecture,  v^hich  was  pub- 
lished in  the  Lutheran  Quarterly  of  July,  1909.  We 
shall  confine  ourselves  here  to  a  brief  outline. 

This  article  discriminates  between  a  true  and  a  false 
veneration  of  the  saints.  The  first  is  commanded,  the 
second  is  rejected. 

I.  The  true  veneration  of  saints  consists  in  this, 
that  we  shall 

1.  Remember  them  for  the  strengthening  of  our  faith; 

2.  That  their  good  works  shall  be  an  example  to  us  for 
imitation. 

II.  The  false  veneration  consists  in  this,  that  men 
call  on  the  saints  in  prayer  and  make  them  mediators 
before  God. 

1.  This  is  not  commanded  in  Scripture,  nor  can  it  be 
substantiated  by  Scripture,  because  there  we  are  led  to 
Christ. 

2.  There  is  no  divine  promise  that  such  prayer  shall 
be  heard. 

Passages  of  Scripture  bearing  on  this  subject:  Heb. 
13:7;  James  5:  10;  Matt.  4:  10;  Acts  10:25,  26;  Rev. 
19:10;  Isaiah  63:16;  John  14:13;  John  5:22,  23; 
Ps.  50:15. 


142  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

THE  CLOSING  PARAGRAPH  TO  THE  FIRST 
TWENTY-ONE  ARTICLES,  OR  THE  DOCTRINAL 
PART  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION : 

This  is  about  the  Sum  of  our  doctrine,  in  which,  as 
can  be  seen,  there  is  nothing  that  varies  from  the  Scrip- 
tures, or  from  the  church  CathoHc,  or  from  the  church 
of  Rome,  as  known  from  its  writers.  This  being  the 
case,  they  judge  harshly  who  insist  that  our  teachers 
should  be  regarded  as  heretics.  The  disagreement,  how- 
ever, is  on  certain  abuses,  which  have  crept  into  the 
Church  without  rightful  authority.  And  even  in  these, 
if  there  were  some  difference,  there  should  be  proper 
lenity  on  the  part  of  bishops  to  bear  with  us  by  reason 
of  the  Confession  which  we  have  now  drawn  up;  because 
even  the  Canons  are  not  so  severe  as  to  demand  the  same 
rights  everywhere,  neither  at  any  time,  have  the  rites  of 
all  churches  been  the  same ;  although  among  us,  in  large 
part,  the  ancient  rites  are  diligently  observed.  For  it  is 
a  false  and  malicious  charge  that  all  the  ceremonies,  all 
the  things  instituted  of  old,  are  abolished  in  our  churches. 
But  it  has  been  a  common  complaint  that  some  abuses 
were  connected  with  the  ordinary  rites.  These,  inasmuch 
as  they  could  not  be  approved  with  a  good  conscience, 
have  been  to  some  extent  corrected. 

How  can  our  Confession  say  that  in  the  articles  which 
have  been  treated  ^'there  is  nothing  that  varies  from  the 
Scriptures,  or  from  the  church  Catholic,  or  from  the 
church  of  Rome  as  known  from  its  writers"? 

1.  We  believe,  of  course,  that  the  doctrines  of  the 
Augsburg  Confession  agree  with  the  Scriptures. 

2.  But  does  our  Confession  agree  with  the  ''Church 
Catholic/'  and  the  ''Church  of  Rome"?  Melanchthon, 
speaking  of  the  "Church  Catholic,"  did  not  mean  the 
opponents  of  the  Lutherans.  He  took  the  position  that 
the  Lutherans  were  the  true  representatives  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  that  their  opponents,  such  as  the 
Pope,  Dr.  Eck  and  all  who  were  now  persecuting  the 
cause  of   the  Gospel,   were  out   of   harmony  with   the 


The  ArcsBURG  Confession.  143 

true  Catholic  Church.  The  aim  all  through  the  Confes- 
sion has  been  to  show  that  the  Lutherans  had  not  de- 
parted from  the  true  Catholic  Church.  When  Melanch- 
thon  spoke  of  the  ''Church  of  Rome"  and  claimed 
agreement  with  it,  he  meant  by  that,  such  writers  as 
Augustine,  Ambrose,  Leo  the  Great,  Gregory  the  Great, 
Saint  Bernard.  He  meant  the  Roman  Church  before  it 
was  corrupted  by  the  abuses  of  which  he  was  going  to 
speak  in  the  second  part  of  the  Confession.  That 
IMelanchthon  in  this  statement  was  too  optimistic  as  to 
the  evangelical  teaching  of  even  these  ''writers"  must  be 
admitted.  We  know  to-day  that  the  "writers"  which 
Melanchthon  had  in  mind,  some  of  which  he  had  quoted 
in  different  articles  of  the  first  part  of  the  Confession, 
were  far  from  being  in  entire  accord  with  the  doctrinal 
system  of  the  Lutheran  Church. 


ARTICLES,   IN   WHICH   ARE   REVIEWED   THE 
ABUSES  WHICH  HAVE  BEEN  CORRECTED. 

Inasmuch  then  as  our  churches  dissent  in  no  article  of  the 
Faith  from  the  Church  Catholic,  but  omit  some  Abuses  which 
are  new,  and  which  have  been  erroneously  accepted  by  fault 
of  the  times,  contrary  to  the  intent  of  the  Canons,  we  pray 
that  Your  Imperial  Majesty  would  graciously  hear  both  what 
has  been  changed,  and  also  what  were  the  reasons,  in  order 
that  the  people  be  not  compelled  to  observe  those  abuses 
against  their  conscience.  Nor  should  Your  Imperial  Majesty 
believe  those,  who,  in  order  to  excite  the  hatred  of  men 
against  our  part,  disseminate  strange  slanders  among  our  people. 
Having  thus  excited  the  minds  of  good  men,  they  have  first 
given  occasion  to  this  controversy,  and  now  endeavor,  by  the 
same  arts,  to  increase  the  discord.  For  Your  Imperial  Majesty 
will  undoubtedly  find  that  the  form  of  doctrine  and  of  cere- 
monies with  us,  is  not  so  intolerable  as  these  ungodly  arid 
malicious  men  represent.  Furthermore,  the  truth  cannot  be 
gathered  from  common  rumors,  or  the  revilings  of  our  enemies. 
But  it  can  readily  be  judged  that  nothing  would  serve  better 
to  maintain  the  dignity  of  worship,  and  to  nourish  reverence  and 
pious  devotion  among  the  people  than  that  the  ceremonies  be 
rightly  observed  in  the  churches. 

Article  XXII. 
To  the  laity  are  given  Both  Kinds  in  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  because  this  usage  has  the  commandment  of  the 


144  'I'h^  Augsburg  Coni^e:ssion. 

Lord  [in  Matt.  26:27]:  "Drink  ye  all  of  it";  where  Christ  has 
manifestly  commanded  concerning  the  cup  that  all  should  drink; 
and  lest  any  man  should  craftily  say  that  this  refers  only  to 
priests,  Paul  [in  i  Cor.  11:27]  recites  an  example  from  which  it 
appears  that  the  whole  congregation  did  use  both  kinds.  And  this 
usage  has  long  remained  in  the  Church,  nor  is  it  known  when, 
or  by  whose  authority,  it  was  changed;  although  Cardinal 
Cusanus  mentions  the  time  when  it  was  approved.  Cyprian  in 
some  places  testifies  that  the  Blood  was  given  to  the  people.  The 
same  is  testified  by  Jerome,  who  says:  "The  priests  administer 
the  Eucharist,  and  distribute  the  Blood  of  Christ  to  the  people." 
Indeed,  Pope  Gelasius  commands  that  the  sacrament  be  not  di- 
vided (Dist.  ii.,  De  Consecratione,  Cap.  Comperimus) .  Only 
custom,  not  so  ancient,  has  it  otherwise.  But  it  is  evident  that 
any  custom  introduced  against  the  commandments  of  God  is  not 
to  be  allowed,  as  the  Canons  witness  (Dist.  iii..  Cap.  Veritate, 
and  the  following  chapters).  But  this  custom  has  been  received, 
not  only  against  the  Scripture  but  also  against  the  old  Canons 
and  example  of  the  Church.  Therefore  if  any  preferred  to  use 
both  kinds  of  the  sacrament,  they  ought  not  to  have  been  com- 
pelled with  offence  to  their  consciences  to  do  otherwise. 

And  because  the  division  of  the  sacrament  does  not  agree  with 
the  ordinance  of  Christ,  we  are  accustomed  to  omit  the  proces- 
sion, which  hitherto  has  been  in  use. 

Article  XXIII. 

There  has  been  common  complaint  concerning  the  Examples 
of  Priests,  who  were  not  chaste.  For  that  reason  also.  Pope 
Pius  is  reported  to  have  said  that  there  were  certain  reasons 
why  marriage  was  taken  away  from  priests,  but  that  there  were 
far  weightier  ones  why  it  ought  to  be  given  back ;  for  so  Platina 
writes.  Since,  therefore,  our  priests  were  desirous  to  avoid  these 
open  scandals  they  married  wives,  and  taught  that  it  was  lawful 
for  them  to  contract  matrimony.  First,  because  Paul  says  [i  Cor. 
7:2]:  "To  avoid  fornication,  let  every  man  have  his  own  wife." 
Also  [9]  :  "It  is  better  to  marry  than  to  burn."  Secondly,  Christ 
says  [Matt.  19:11]:  "All  men  cannot  receive  this  saying," 
where  he  teaches  that  not  all  men  are  fit  to  lead  a  single  life ; 
for  God  created  man  for  procreation  [Gen.  1:28].  Nor  is  it  in 
man's  power,  without  a  singular  gift  and  work  of  God,  to  alter 
this  creation.  Therefore  those  that  are  not  fit  to  lead  a  single 
life  ought  to  contract  matrimony.  For  no  man's  law,  no  vow, 
can  annul  the  commandment  and  ordinance  of  God.  For  these 
reasons  the  priests  teach  that  it  is  lawful  for  them  to  marry 
wives.  It  is  also  evident  that  in  the  ancient  Church  priests  were 
married  men.  For  Paul  says  [i  Tim.  3:2]  that  a  bishop  should 
be  the  husband  of  one  wife.  And  in  Germany,  four  hundred 
years  ago  for  the  first  time,  the  priests  were  violently  compelled 
to  lead  a  single  life,  who  indeed  offered  such  resistance  that  the 
Archbishop  of  Mayence,  when  about  to  publish  the  Pope's  decree 


Th£:  Augsburg  Con]?ession.  145 

concerning  this  matter,  was  almost  killed  in  the  tumult  raised 
by  the  enraged  priests.  And  so  harsh  was  the  dealing  in  the 
matter  that  not  only  were  marriages  forbidden  for  the  time  to 
come,  but  also  existing  marriages  were  torn  asunder,  contrary  to 
all  laws,  divine  and  human,  contrary  even  to  the  Canons  them- 
selves, made  not  only  by  the  Popes  but  by  most  celebrated  Coun- 
cils. 

Seeing  also  that,  as  the  world  is  aging,  man's  nature  is  gradu- 
ally growing  weaker,  it  is  well  to  guard  that  no  more  vices  steal 
into  Germany.  Furthermore,  God  ordained  marriage  to  be  a 
help  against  human  infirmity.  The  Canons  themselves  say  that 
the  old  rigor  ought  now  and  then,  in  the  latter  times,  to  be  re- 
laxed because  of  the  weakness  of  men;  which  it  is  to  be  de- 
voutly wished  were  done  also  in  this  matter.  And  it  is  to  be 
expected  that  the  churches  shall  at  length  lack  pastors,  if  mar- 
riage should  be  any  longer  forbidden. 

But  while  the  commandment  of  God  is  in  force,  while  the 
custom  of  the  Church  is  well  known,  while  impure  celibacy 
causes  many  scandals,  adulteries,  and  other  crimes  deserving  the 
punishments  of  just  magistrates,  yet  it  is  a  marvellous  thing  that 
in  nothing  is  more  cruelty  exercised  than  against  the  marriage 
of  priests.  God  has  given  commandment  to  honor  marriage. 
By  the  laws  of  all  well-ordered  commonwealths,  even  among  the 
heathen,  marriage  is  most  highly  honored.  But  now  men,  and 
also  priests,  are  cruelly  put  to  death,  contrary  to  the  intent  of 
the  Canons,  for  no  other  cause  than  marriage.  Paul  [in  i  Tim. 
4:  3]  calls  that  a  doctrine  of  devils,  which  forbids  marriage.  This 
may  now  be  readily  understood  when  the  law  against  marriage  is 
maintained  by  such  penalties. 

But  as  no  law  of  man  can  annul  the  commandment  of  God, 
so  neither  can  it  be  done  by  any  vow.  Accordingly  Cyprian  also 
advises  that  women  who  do  not  keep  the  chastity  they  have 
promised  should  marry.  His  words  are  these  [Book  I.,  Epistle 
xi.]  :  "But  if  they  be  unwilling  or  unable  to  persevere,  it  is  bet- 
ter for  them  to  marry  than  to  fall  into  the  fire  by  their  lusts; 
at  least,  they  should  give  no  ofifence  to  their  brethren  and  sis- 
ters." And  even  the  Canons  show  some  leniency  toward  those 
who  have  taken  vows  before  the  proper  age,  as  heretofore  has 
generally  been  the  case. 

Article  XXIV. 

Falsely  are  our  churches  accused  of  Abolishing  the  Mass ;  for 
the  Mass  is  retained  on  our  part,  and  celebrated  with  the  highest 
reverence.  All  the  usual  ceremonies  are  also  preserved,  save 
that  the  parts  sung  in  Latin  are  interspersed  here  and  there  with 
German  hymns,  which  have  been  added  to  teach  the  people.  For 
ceremonies  are  needed  to  this  end  alone,  that  the  unlearned  be 
taught.  And  not  only  has  Paul  commanded  to  use  in  the  Church 
a  language  understood  by  the  people  [i  Cor.  14:2,  9],  but  it  has 
also  been  so  ordained  by  man's  law. 


146  Tiir.  Augsburg  Confession. 

The  people  are  accustomed  to  partake  of  the  Sacrament  to- 
gether, if  any  be  fit  for  it,  and  this  also  increases  the  reverence 
and  devotion  of  public  worship.  For  none  are  admitted  except 
they  be  first  proved.  The  people  are  also  advised  concerning 
the  dignity  and  use  of  the  Sacrament,  how  great  consolation  it 
brings  anxious  consciences,  that  they  may  learn  to  believe  God, 
and  to  expect  and  ask  of  Him  all  that  is  good.  This  worship 
pleases  God;  such  use  of  the  Sacrament  nourishes  true  devotion 
toward  God.  It  does  not,  therefore,  appear  that  the  Mass  is 
more  devoutly  celebrated  among  our  adversaries,  than  among  us. 

But  it  is  evident  that  for  a  long  time,  it  has  been  the  public 
and  most  grievous  complaint  of  all  good  men,  that  Masses  have 
been  basely  profaned  and  appUed  to  purposes  of  lucre.  For  it  is 
unknown  how  far  this  abuse  obtains  in  all  the  churches,  by  what 
manner  of  men  Masses  are  said  only  for  fees  or  stipends,  and  how 
many  celebrate  them  contrary  to  the  Canons.  But  Paul  severely 
threatens  those  who  deal  unworthily  with  the  Eucharist,  when  he 
says  [i  Cor.  11  127]  :  "Whosoever  shall  eat  this  bread,  and  drink 
this  cup  of  the  Lord  unworthily,  shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  the  Lord."  When,  therefore,  our  priests  were  admon- 
ished concerning  this  sin,  Private  Masses  were  discontinued 
among  us,  as  scarcely  any  Private  Masses  were  celebrated  except 
for  lucre's  sake. 

Neither  were  the  bishops  ignorant  of  these  abuses,  and  if  they 
had  corrected  them  in  time,  there  would  now  be  less  dissension. 
Heretofore,  by  their  own  negligence,  they  suffered  many  cor- 
ruptions to  creep  into  the  Church.  Now,  when  it  is  too  late, 
they  begin  to  complain  of  the  troubles  of  the  Church,  seeing  that 
this  disturbance  has  been  occasioned  simply  by  those  abuses, 
which  were  so  manifest  that  they  could  be  borne  no  longer. 
Great  dissensions  have  arisen  concerning  the  Mass,  concerning 
the  Sacrament.  Perhaps  the  world  is  being  punished  for  such 
long-continued  profanations  of  the  Mass,  as  have  been  tolerated 
in  the  churches  for  so  many  centuries,  by  the  very  men  who 
were  both  able  and  in  duty  bound  to  correct  them.  For,  in  the 
Ten  Commandments,  it  is  written  (Exodus  20),  "The  Lord  will 
not  hold  him  guiltless  that  taketh  His  name  in  vain."  But  since 
the  world  began,  nothing  that  God  ever  ordained  seems  to  have 
been  so  abused  for  filthy  lucre  as  the  Mass. 

There  was  also  added  the  opinion  which  infinitely  increased 
Private  Masses,  namely,  that  Christ,  by  liis  passion,  had  made 
satisfaction  for  original  sin,  and  instituted  the  Mass  wherein  an 
offering  should  be  made  for  daily  sins,  venial  and  mortal.  From 
this  has  arisen  the  common  opinion  that  the  Mass  taketh  away 
the  sins  of  the  living  and  the  dead,  by  the  outward  act.  Then 
they  began  to  dispute  whether  one  Mass  said  for  many  were 
worth  as  much  as  special  Masses  for  individuals,  and  this 
brought  forth  that  infinite  multitude  of  Masses.  Concerning 
these  opinions  our  teachers  have  given  warning,  that  they  de- 
part  from  the   Holy   Scriptures   and  diminish  the  glory  of   the 


The  xA.ugsburg  Confession.  147 

passion  of  Christ.  For  Christ's  passion  was  an  oblation  and 
satisfaction,  not  for  original  guilt  only,  but  also  for  all  sins,  as 
it  is  written  to  the  Hebrews  (lo:  lo),  "We  are  sanctified  through 
the  offering  of  Jesus  Christ,  once  for  all."  Also,  lo:  14:  "By  one 
offering  he  hath  perfected  forever  them  that  are  sanctified." 
Scripture  also  teaches  that  we  are  justified  before  God  through 
faith  in  Christ,  when  we  believe  that  our  sins  are  forgiven  for 
Christ's  sake.  Now  if  the  Mass  take  away  the  sins  of  the  living 
and  the  dead  by  the  outward  act,  justification  comes  of  the  work 
of  Masses,  and  not  of  faith,  which  Scripture  does  not  allow. 

But  Christ  commands  us  [Luke  22:  19],  "This  do  in  remem- 
brance of  me;"  therefore  the  Mass  was  instituted  that  the  faith 
of  those  who  use  the  Sacrament  should  remember  what  benefits 
it  receives  through  Christ,  and  cheer  and  comfort  the  anxious 
conscience.  For,  to  remember  Christ,  is  to  remember  his  benefits, 
and  to  realize  that  they  are  truly  offered  unto  us.  Nor  is  it 
enough  only  to  remember  the  history,  for  this  the  Jew  and  the 
ungodly  also  can  remember.  Wherefore  the  Mass  is  to  be  used 
to  this  end,  that  there  the  Sacrament  [Communion]  may  be  ad- 
ministered to  them  that  have  need  of  consolation ;  as  Ambrose 
says :  "Because  I  always  sin,  I  am  always  bound  to  take  the 
medicine." 

Now  forasmuch  as  the  Mass  is  such  a  giving  of  the  Sacrament, 
we  hold  one  communion  every  holyday,  and  also  other  days, 
when  any  desire  the  Sacrament  it  is  given  to  such  as  ask  for  it. 
And  this  custom  is  not  new  in  the  Church ;  for  the  Fathers  be- 
fore Gregory  make  no  mention  of  any  private  Mass,  but  of  the 
common  Mass  [the  Communion]  they  speak  very  much.  Chrys- 
ostom  says  that  the  priest  stands  daily  at  the  altar,  inviting  some 
to  the  Communion  and  keeping  back  others.  And  it  appears 
from  the  ancient  Canons,  that  some  one  celebrated  the  Mass 
from  whom  all  the  other  presbyters  and  deacons  received  the 
Body  of  the  Lord ;  for  thus  the  words  of  the  Nicene  Canon  say : 
"Let  the  deacons,  according  to  their  order,  receive  the  Holy  Com- 
munion after  the  presbyters,  from  the  bishop  or  from  a  pres- 
byter." And  Paul  [i  Cor.  11 :  ss]  commands  concerning  the  Com- 
munion :  "Tarry  one  for  another,"  so  that  there  may  be  a  com- 
mon participation. 

Forasmuch,  therefore,  as  the  Mass  with  us  has  the  example  of 
the  Church,  taken  from  the  Scripture  and  the  Fathers,  we  are 
confident  that  it  cannot  be  disapproved,  especially  since  the  pub- 
lic ceremonies  are  retained  for  the  most  part,  like  those  hitherto 
in  use;  only  the  number  of  Masses  differs,  which,  because  of  very 
great  and  manifest  abuses,  doubtless  might  be  profitably  reduced. 
For  in  olden  times,  even  in  churches,  most  frequented,  the  Mass 
was  not  celebrated  every  day,  as  the  Tripartite  History  (Book  9, 
chapt.  33)  testifies:  "Again  in  Alexandria,  every  Wednesday 
and  Friday,  the_  Scriptures  are  read,  and  the  doctors  expound 
them,  and  all  things  are  done,  except  only  the  celebration  of  the 
Eucharist." 


148  Th^  Augsburg  Coni^e:ssion. 

Article  XXV. 

Confession  in  our  churches  is  not  abolished;  for  it  is  not  usual 
to  give  the  Body  of  the  Lord,  except  to  them  that  have  been 
previously  examined  and  absolved.  And  the  people  are  most 
carefully  taught  concerning  the  faith  and  assurance  of  absolu- 
tion, about  which,  before  this  time,  there  was  profound  silence. 
Our  people  are  taught  that  they  should  highly  prize  the  absolu- 
tion, as  being  the  voice  of  God,  and  pronounced  by  His  com- 
mand. The  power  of  the  Keys  is  commended,  and  we  show  what 
great  consolation  it  brings  to  anxious  consciences ;  that  God  re- 
quires faith  to  believe  such  absolution  as  a  voice  sounding  from 
Heaven,  and  that  such  faith  in  Christ  truly  obtains  and  receives 
the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

Aforetime,  satisfactions  were  immoderately  extolled;  of  faith 
and  the  merit  ol  Christ,  and  the  righteousness  of  faith,  no  men- 
tion was  made ;  wherefore,  on  this  point  our  churches  are  by  no 
means  to  be  blamed.  For  this  even  our  adversaries  must  needs 
concede  to  us,  that  the  doctrine  concerning  repentance  has  been 
most  diligently  treated  and  laid  open  by  our  teachers. 

But  of  Confession,  they  teach,  that  an  enumeration  of  sins  is 
not  necessary,  and  that  consciences  be  not  burdened  with  anxiety 
to  enumerate  all  sins,  for  it  is  impossible  to  recount  all  sins,  as 
the  Psalm  testifies  [19:13]:  "Who  can  understand  his  errors?" 
Also  Jeremiah  [17:9]:  "The  heart  is  deceitful,  who  can  know 
it?"  But  if  no  sins  were  forgiven,  except  those  that  are  re- 
counted, consciences  could  never  find  peace ;  for  very  many  sins 
they  neither  see,  nor  can  remember. 

The  ancient  writers  also  testify  that  an  enumeration  is  not 
necessary.  For,  in  the  Decrees,  Chrysostom  is  quoted,  who  thus 
says :  "1  say  not  to  thee,  that  thou  shouldest  disclose  thyself  in 
public,  nor  that  thou  accuse  thyself  before  others,  but  I  would 
have  thee  obey  the  prophet  who  says :  'Disclose  thy  way  before 
God.'  Therefore  confess  thy  sins  before  God,  the  true  Judge, 
with  prayer.  Tell  thine  errors,  not  with  the  tongue,  but  with 
the  memory  of  thy  conscience."  And  the  Gloss  ("Of  Repent- 
ance," Distinct,  v,  Cap.  Consideret)  admits  that  Confession  of 
human  right  only.  Nevertheless,  on  account  of  the  great  benefit 
of  absolution,  and  because  it  is  otherwise  useful  to  the  conscience, 
Confession  is   retained  among  us. 

ART1C1.E  XXVI. 

It  has  been  the  general  persuasion,  not  of  the  people  alone, 
but  also  of  such  as  teach  in  the  churches,  that  making  Distinc- 
tions of  Meats,  and  like  traditions  of  men,  are  works  profitable 
to  merit  grace,  and  able  to  make  satisfactions  for  sins.  And  that 
the  world  so  thought,  appears  from  this,  that  new  ceremonies, 
new  orders,  new  holydays,  and  new  fastings  were  daily  insti- 
tuted, and  the  teachers  in  the  churches  did  exact  these  works  as 
a  service  necessary  to  merit  grace,  and  did  greatly  terrify  men's 
consciences,  if  they  should  omit  any  of  these  things.    From  this 


Thk  Augsburg  Coni^^ssion.  i^ig 

persuasion  concerning  traditions,  much  detriment  has  resulted 
in  the  Church. 

First,  the  doctrine  of  grace  and  of  the  righteousness  of  faith 
has  been  obscured  by  it,  which  is  the  chief  part  of  the  Gospel, 
and  ought  to  stand  out,  as  the  most  prominent  in  the  Church, 
that  the  merit  of  Christ  may  be  well  known,  and  that  faith, 
which  believes  that  sins  are  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake  may  be 
exalted  far  above  works.  Wherefore  Paul  also  lays  the  greatest 
stress  on  this  article,  putting  side  the  law  and  human  traditions, 
in  order  to  show  that  the  righteousness  of  the  Christian  is  another 
than  such  works,  to  wit,  the  faith  which  believes  that  sins  are 
freely  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake.  But  this  doctrine  of  Paul  has 
been  almost  wholly  smothered  by  traditions,  which  have  pro- 
duced an  opinion  that,  by  making  distinctions  in  meats  and  like 
services,  we  must  merit  grace  and  righteousness.  In  treating  of 
repentance,  there  was  no  mention  made  of  faith;  all  that  was 
done  was  to  set  forth  those  works  of  satisfaction,  and  in  these 
all  repentance  seemed  to  consist. 

Secondly,  these  traditions  have  obscured  the  commandments  of 
God;  because  traditions  were  placed  far  above  the  command- 
ments of  God.  Christianity  was  thought  to  consist  wholly  in  the 
observance  of  certain  holydays,  fasts  and  vestures.  These  ob- 
servances had  won  for  themselves  the  exalted  title  of  being  the 
spiritual  life  and  the  perfect  life.  Meanwhile  the  commandments 
of  God,  according  to  each  one's  calling,  were  without  honor, 
namely,  that  the  father  brought  up  his  family,  that  the  mother 
bore  children,  that  the  Prince  governed  the  Commonwealth, — 
these  were  accounted  works  that  were  worldly  and  imperfect,  and 
far  below  those  glittering  observances.  And  this  error  greatly 
tormented  devout  consciences,  which  grieved  that  they  were 
bound  by  an  imperfect  state  of  life,  as  in  marriage,  in  the  office 
of  magistrate,  or  in  other  civil  ministrations ;  on  the  other  hand, 
they  admired  the  monks  and  such  like,  and  falsely  imagined  that 
the  observances  of  such  men  were  more  acceptable  to  God. 

Thirdly,  traditions  brought  great  danger  to  consciences ;  for  it 
was  impossible  to  keep  all  traditions,  and  yet  men  judged  these 
observances  to  be  necessary  acts  of  worship.  Gerson  writes  that 
many  fell  into  despair,  and  that  some  even  took  their  own  lives, 
because  they  felt  that  they  were  not  able  to  satisfy  the  tradi- 
tions ;  and  meanwhile,  they  heard  not  the  consolation  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith  and  grace. 

We  see  that  the  summists  and  theologians  gather  the  tradi- 
tions together,  and  seek  mitigations  whereby  to  ease  consciences, 
and  yet  they  do  not  succeed  in  releasing  them,  but  sometimes  en- 
tangle consciences  even  more.  And  with  the  gathering  of  these 
traditions,  the  schools  and  sermons  have  been  so  much  occupied 
that  they  have  had  no  leisure  to  touch  upon  Scripture,  and  to 
seek  the  more  profitable  doctrine  of  faith,  of  the  cross,  of  hope, 
of  the  dignity  of  civil  affairs,  of  consolation  of  sorely  tried  con- 
sciences.   Hence  Gerson,  and  some  other  theologians,  have  griev- 


I50  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

ously  complained,  that  by  these  strivings  concerning  traditions, 
they  were  prevented  from  giving  attention  to  a  better  kind  of 
doctrine.  Augustine  also  forbids  that  men's  consciences  should 
be  burdened  with  such  observances,  and  prudently  advises  Janu- 
arius,  that  he  must  know  that  they  are  to  be  observed  as  things 
indifferent;  for  these  are  his  words. 

Wherefore  our  teachers  must  not  be  looked  upon  as  having 
taken  up  this  matter  rashly,  or  from  hatred  of  the  bishops,  as 
some  falsely  suspect.  There  was  great  need  to  warn  the  churches 
of  these  errors,  which  had  arisen  from  misunderstanding  the  tra- 
ditions. For  the  Gospel  compels  us  to  insist  in  the  churches  upon 
the  doctrine  of  grace,  and  of  the  righteousness  of  faith;  which, 
however,  cannot  be  understood,  if  men  think  that  they  merit 
grace  by  observances  of  their  own  choice. 

Thus,  therefore,  they  have  taught,  that  by  the  observance  of 
human  traditions  we  cannot  merit  grace,  or  be  justified;  and 
hence  we  must  not  think  such  observances  necessary  acts  of 
worship. 

They  add  hereunto  testimonies  of  Scripture.  Christ  [Matt.  15: 
3]  defends  the  Apostles  who  had  not  observed  the  usual  tradi- 
tion, which,  however,  seemed  to  pertain  to  a  matter  not  unlawful, 
but  indifferent,  and  to  have  a  certain  affinity  with  the  purifica- 
tions of  the  law,  and  says  [9]  :  "In  vain  do  they  worship  me  with 
the  commandments  of  men."  He,  therefore,  does  not  exact  an 
unprofitable  service.  Shortly  after,  he  adds  [n]  :  "Not  that 
which  goeth  into  the  mouth,  defileth  a  man."  So  also  Paul  [Rom, 
14:  17]:  "The  Kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink."  _  [Col, 
2:  16]  "Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you  in  meat,  or  in  drink,  or 
in  respect  of  an  holyday,  or  of  the  Sabbath  day ;"  also  [v.  20, 
sq.]  :  "If  ye  be  dead  with  Christ  from  the  rudiments  of  the 
world,  why,  as  though  living  in  the  world,  are  ye  subject  to 
ordinances,  touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not?"  And  Peter  says 
[Acts  15:  10]  :  "Why  tempt  ye  God,  to  put  a  yoke  upon  the  neck 
of  the  disciples,  which  neither  our  fathers,  nor  we  were  able  to 
bear ;  but  we  believe  that  through  the  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  we  shall  be  saved,  even  as  they."  Here  Peter  forbids  to 
burden  the  consciences  with  many  rites,  either  of  Moses,  or  of 
others. 

And  in  i  Tim.  [4:  i,  3]  Paul  calls  the  prohibition  of  meats  a 
doctrine  of  devils ;  for  it  is  against  the  Gospel  to  institute  or  to 
do  such  works  that  by  them  we  may  merit  grace,  or  as  though 
Christianity  could  not  exist  without  such  service  of  God, 

Here  our  adversaries  cast  up  that  our  teachers  are  opposed  to 
discipline  and  mortification  of  the  flesh,  as  Jovinian.  But  the 
contrary  may  be  learned  from  the  writings  of  our  teachers.  For 
they  have  always  taught  concerning  the  cross,  that  it  behooves 
Christians  to  bear  afiiictions.  This  is  the  true,  earnest  and  un- 
feigned mortification,  to  wit,  to  be  exercised  with  divers  afflic- 
tions, and  to  be  crucified  with  Christ. 

Moreover,  they  teach,  that  every  Christian  ought  to  exercise 


The  Augsburg  Coni^e:ssion.  151 

and  subdue  himself  with  bodily  restraints  and  labors,  that  neither 
plenty  nor  sloth  fulness  tempt  him  to  sin,  but  not  that  we  may 
merit  grace  or  make  satisfaction  for  sins  by  such  exercises.  And 
such  external  discipline  ought  to  be  urged  at  all  times,  not  only 
on  a  few  and  set  days.  So  Christ  commands  [Luke  21  :  34]  : 
"Take  heed,  lest  your  hearts  be  overcharged  with  surfeiting;" 
also  [Matt.  17:21]  :  "This  kind  goeth  not  out  but  by  prayer  and 
fasting."  Paul  also  says  [i  Cor.  9:27]  :  "I  keep  under  my  body 
and  bring  it  into  subjection."  Here  he  clearly  shows  that  he 
was  keeping  under  his  body,  not  to  merit  forgiveness  of  sins  by 
that  discipline,  but  to  have  his  body  in  subjection  and  fitted  for 
spiritual  things,  and  for  the  discharge  of  duty  according  to  his 
calling.  Therefore,  we  do  not  condemn  fasting,  but  the  tradi- 
tions which  prescribe  certain  days  and  certain  meats,  with  peril 
of  conscience,  as  though  works  of  such  kinds  were  a  necessary 
service. 

Nevertheless,  very  many  traditions  are  kept  on  our  part,  which 
conduce  to  good  order  in  the  Church,  as  the  Order  of  Lessons 
in  the  Mass,  and  the  .chief  holydays.  But,  at  the  same  time,  men 
are  warned  that  such  observances  do  not  justify  before  God,  and 
that,  in  such  things,  it  should  not  be  made  sin,  if  they  be  omitted 
without  scandal.  Such  liberty  in  human  rites  was  not  unknown 
to  the  Fathers.  For  in  the  East  they  kept  Easter  at  another  time 
than  at  Rome,  and  when,  on  account  of  this  diversity,  the 
Romans  accused  the  Eastern  Church  of  schism,  they  were  ad- 
monished by  others  that  such  usages  need  not  be  alike  every- 
where. And  Irenaeus  says :  "Diversity  concerning  fasting  does 
not  destroy  the  harmony  of  faith."  As  also  Pope  Gregory  inti- 
mates in  Dist.  xii.,  that  such  diversity  does  not  violate  the  unity 
of  the  Church.  And  in  the  Tripartite  History,  Book  9,  many  ex- 
amples of  dissimilar  rites  are  gathered,  and  the  following  state- 
ment is  made :  "It  was  not  the  mind  of  the  Apostles  to  enact 
rules  concerning  holydays,  but  to  preach  godUness  and  a  holy 
life." 

Article  XXVH. 

What  is  taught  on  our  part,  concerning  Monastic  Vows,  will 
be  better  understood,  if  it  be  remembered  what  has  been  the 
state  of  the  monasteries,  and  how  many  things  were  daily  done 
in  those  very  monasteries,  contrary  to  the  Canons.  In  Augus- 
tine's time,  they  were  free  associations.  Afterward,  when  dis- 
cipline was  corrupted,  vows  were  everywhere  added  for  the  pur- 
pose of  restoring  discipline,  as  in  a  carefully  planned  prison. 
Gradually,  many  other  observances  were  added  besides  vows. 
And  these  fetters  were  laid  upon  many  before  the  lawful  age, 
contrary  to  the  Canons.  Many  also  entered  into  this  kind  of 
life  through  ignorance,  being  unable  to  judge  their  own  strength, 
though  they  were  of  sufficient  age.  Being  thus  ensnared,  they 
were  compelled  to  remain,  even  though  some  could  have  been 
freed  by  the  provision  of  the  Canons.     And  this  was  more  the 


152  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

case  in  convents  of  women  than  of  monks,  although  more  con- 
sideration should  have  been  shown  the  weaker  sex.  This  rigor 
displeased  many  good  men  before  this  time,  who  saw  that  young 
men  and  maidens  were  thrown  into  convents  for  a  living,  and 
what  unfortunate  results  came  of  this  procedure,  and  what  scan- 
dals were  created,  what  snares  were  cast  upon  consciences !  They 
were  grieved  that  the  authority  of  the  Canons  in  so  momentous 
a  matter  was  utterly  despised  and  set  aside. 

To  these  evils,  was  added  an  opinion  concerning  vows,  which, 
it  is  well  known,  in  former  times,  displeased  even  those  monks 
who  were  more  thoughtful.  They  taught  that  vows  were  equal 
to  Baptism;  they  taught  that,  by  this  kind  of  life,  they  merited 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  justification  before  God.  Yea,  they  added 
that  the  monastic  life  not  only  merited  righteousness  before  God, 
but  even  greater  things,  because  it  kept  not  only  the  precepts, 
but  also  the  so-called  "evangelical  counsels." 

Thus  they  made  men  believe  that  the  profession  of  monasti- 
cism  was  far  better  than  Baptism,  and  that  the  monastic  life 
was  more  meritorious  than  that  of  magistrates,  than  the  life  of 
pastors  and  such  like,  who  serve  their  calling  in  accordance  with 
God's  commands,  without  any  man-made  services.  None  of  these 
things  can  be  denied ;  for  they  appear  in  their  own  books. 

What  then  came  to  pass  in  the  monasteries?  Aforetime,  they 
were  schools  of  Theology  and  other  branches,  profitable  to  the 
Church ;  and  thence  pastors  and  bishops  were  obtained.  Now  it 
is  another  thing.  It  is  needless  to  rehearse  what  is  known  to  all. 
Aforetime  they  came  together  to  learn ;  now  they  feign  that  it 
is  a  kind  of  life  instituted  to  merit  grace  and  righteousness ;  yea, 
they  preach  that  it  is  a  state  of  perfection,  and  they  put  it  far 
above  all  other  kinds  of  life  ordained  of  God. 

These  things  we  have  rehearsed  without  odious  exaggeration, 
to  the  end  that  the  doctrine  of  our  teachers,  on  this  point,  might 
be  better  understood.  First,  concerning  such  as  contract  matri- 
mony, they  teach,  on  our  part,  that  it  is  lawful  for  all  men  who 
are  not  fitted  for  single  life  to  contract  matrimony,  because  vows 
cannot  annul  the  ordinance  and  commandment  of  God.  But  the 
commandment  of  God  is  [i  Cor.  7:2]:  "To  avoid  fornication, 
let  every  man  have  his  own  wife."  Nor  is  it  the  commandment 
only,  but  also  the  creation  and  ordinance  of  God,  which  forces 
those  to  marry  who  are  not  excepted  by  a  singular  work  of  God, 
according  to  the  text  [Gen.  2:18]:  "It  is  not  good  that  the  man 
should  be  alone."  Therefore  they  do  not  sin  who  obey  this  com- 
mandment and  ordinance  of  God.  What  objection  can  be  raised 
to  this?  Let  men  extol  the  obligation  of  a  vow  as  much  as  they 
list,  yet  shall  they  not  bring  to  pass  that  the  vow  annuls  the 
commandment  of  God.  The  Canons  teach  that  the  right  of  the 
superior  is  excepted  in  every  vow ;  much  less,  therefore,  are 
these  vows  of  force  which  are  against  the  commandments  of  God. 

Now  if  the  obligation  of  vows  could  not  be  changed  for  any 
cause  whatever,  the  Roman  Pontiffs  could  never  have  given  dis- 
pensation; for  it  is  not  lawful  for  man  to  annul  an  obligation 


The:  Augsburg  Confession.  153 

which  is  altogether  divine.  But  the  Roman  Pontiffs  have  pru- 
dently judged  that  leniency  is  to  be  observed  in  this  obligation, 
and  therefore  we  read  that  many  times  they  have  dispensed  from 
vows.  The  case  of  the  King  of  Aragon  who  was  called  back 
from  the  monastery  is  well  known,  and  there  are  also  examples 
in  our  own  times. 

In  the  second  place,  Why  do  our  adversaries  exaggerate  the 
obhgation  or  effect  of  a  vow,  when  at  the  same  time,  they  have 
not  a  word  to  say  of  the  nature  of  the  vow  itself,  that  it  ought 
to  be  in  a  thing  possible,  free,  and  chosen  spontaneously  and  de- 
liberately. But  it  is  not  known  to  what  extent  perpetual  chastity 
is  in  the  power  of  man.  And  how  few  are  there  who  have  taken 
the  vow  spontaneously  and  deliberately !  Young  men  and  maid- 
ens, before  they  are  able  to  judge,  are  persuaded,  and  sometimes 
even  compelled,  to  take  the  vow.  Wherefore  it  is  not  fair  to 
insist  so  rigorously  on  the  obhgation,  since  it  is  granted  by  all 
that  it  is  against  the  nature  of  a  vow  to  take  it  without  spon- 
taneous and  deliberate  action. 

Many  canonical  laws  rescind  vows  made  before  the  age  of 
fifteen;  for  before  that  age,  there  does  not  seem  sufficient  judg- 
ment in  a  person  to  decide  concerning  a  perpetual  life.  Another 
Canon,  granting  even  more  liberty  to  the  weakness  of  man,  adds 
a  few  years,  and  forbids  a  vow  to  be  made  before  the  age  ot 
eighteen.  But  whether  we  followed  the  one  or  the  other,  the 
most  part  have  an  excuse  for  leaving  the  monasteries,  because 
most  of  them  have  taken  vows  before  they  reached  these  ages. 

But,  finally,  even  though  the  violation  of  a  vow  might  be  re- 
buked, yet  it  seems  not  forthwith  to  follow  that  the  marriag'^s 
of  such  persons  ought  to  be  dissolved.  For  Augustine  denies 
that  they  ought  to  be  dissolved  (xxvii.  Qusest.  I.,  Cap.  Niip- 
tiarum)  ;  and  his  authority  is  not  lightly  to  be  esteemed,  although 
other  men  afterwards  thought  otherwise. 

But  although  it  appears  that  God's  comm.and  concerning  mar- 
riage delivers  many  from  their  vows,  yet  our  teachers  introduce 
also  another  argument  concerning  vows,  to  show  that  they  are 
void.  For  every  service  of  God,  ordained  and  chosen  of  men 
without  the  commandment  of  God  to  merit  justification  and 
grace,  is  wicked;  as  Christ  says  [Matt.  15  :  9]  :  "In  vain  do  they 
worship  me  with  the  commandments  of  men."  And  Paul  teaches 
everywhere  that  righteousness  is  not  to  be  sought  by  our  own 
observances  and  acts  of  worship,  devised  by  men,  but  that  it 
comes  by  faith  to  those  who  believe  that  they  are  received  by 
God  into  grace  for  Christ's  sake. 

But  it  is  evident  that  monks  have  taught  that  services  of  man's 
making  satisfy  for  sins  and  merit  grace  and  justification.  What 
else  is  this  but  to  detract  from  the  glory  of  Christ  and  to  obscure 
and  deny  the  righteousness  of  faith?  It  follows,  therefore,  that 
the  vows  thus  commonly  taken,  have  been  wicked  services,  and, 
consequently,  are  void.  For  a  wicked  vow,  taken  against  the 
commandment  of  God,  is  not  valid;  for  (as  the  Canon  says)  no 
vow  ought  to  bind  men  to  wickedness. 


154  The  Augsburg  Confession. 

Paul  says  [Gal.  5:4]:  ''Christ  is  become  of  no  effect  unto  you, 
whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the  law;  ye  are  fallen  from 
grace."  They,  therefore,  who  want  to  be  justified  by  their  vows, 
are  made  void  of  Christ  and  fall  from  grace.  For  such  as  ascribe 
justification  to  vows,  ascribe  to  their  own  works  that  which  prop- 
erly belongs  to  the  glory  of  Christ.  But  it  is  undeniable  that  the 
monks  have  taught  that,  by  their  vows  and  observances,  they 
were  justified,  and  merited  forgiveness  of  sins,  yea,  they  invented 
still  greater  absurdities,  saying  that  they  could  give  others  a  share 
in  their  works.  If  anyone  should  be  inclined  to  enlarge  on  these 
things  with  evil  intent,  how  many  things  could  he  bring  together, 
whereof  even  the  monks  are  now  ashamed !  Over  and  above 
this,  they  persuaded  men  that  services  of  man's  making  were  a 
state  of  Christian  perfection.  And  is  not  this  assigning  justifica- 
tion to  works?  It  is  no  Hght  offence  in  the  Church  to  set  forth 
to  the  people  a  service  devised  by  men,  without  the  command- 
ment of  God,  and  to  teach  that  such  service  justifies  men.  For 
the  righteousness  of  faith  in  Christ,  which  chiefly  ought  to  be  in 
the  Church,  is  obscured,  when  this  wonderful  worshipping  of 
angels,  with  its  show  of  poverty,  humility  and  chastity,  is  cast 
before  the  eyes  of  men. 

Furthermore,  the  precepts  of  God  and  the  true  service  of  God 
are  obscured  when  men  hear  that  only  monks  are  in  a  state  of 
perfection.  For  Christian  perfection  is  to  fear  God  from  the 
heart,  again  to  conceive  great  faith,  and  to  trust  that,  for  Christ's 
sake,  we  have  a  gracious  God,  to  ask  of  God,  and  assuredly  to 
expect  his  aid  in  all  things  that,  according  to  our  calling,  are  to 
be  borne;  and  meanwhile,  to  be  diligent  in  outward  good  works, 
and  to  serve  our  calling.  In  these  things  consist  the  true  per- 
fection and  the  true  service  of  God.  It  does  not  consist  in  the 
unmarried  life,  or  in  begging,  or  in  vile  apparel.  But  the  people 
conceive  many  pernicious  opinions  from  the  false  commenda- 
tions of  monastic  life.  They  hear  unmarried  Hfe  praised  above 
measure ;  therefore  they  lead  their  married  Hfe  with  offence  to 
their  consciences.  They  hear  that  only  beggars  are  perfect ; 
therefore  they  keep  their  possessions  and  do  business  with  of- 
fence to  their  consciences.  They  hear  that  it  is  an  evangelical 
counsel  not  to  avenge;  therefore  some  in  private  life  are  not 
afraid  to  take  revenge,  for  they  hear  that  it  is  but  a  counsel,  and 
not  a  commandment;  while  others  judge  that  the  Christian  can- 
not properly  hold  a  civil  office,  or  be  a  magistrate. 

There  are  on  record  examples  of  men  who,  forsaking  mar- 
riage and  the  administration  of  the  Commonwealth,  have  hid 
themselves  in  monasteries.  This  they  called  fleeing  from  the 
world,  and  seeking  a  kind  of  life  which  should  be  more  pleasing 
to  God.  Neither  did  they  see  that  God  ought  to  be  served  in 
those  commandments  which  he  himself  has  given,  and  not  in  com- 
mandments devised  by  men.  A  good  and  perfect  kind  of  life 
is  that  which  has  for  it  the  commandment  of  God.  It  is  nec- 
essary to  admonish  men  of  these  things.  And  before  these  times, 
Gerson   rebuked  this   error  concerning  perfection,  and  testified 


The^  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  155 

that,  in  his  day,  it  was  a  new  saying  that  the  monastic  life  is  a 
state  of  perfection. 

So  many  wicked  opinions  are  inherent  in  the  vows,  such  as 
that  they  justify,  that  they  constitute  Christian  perfection,  that 
they  keep  the  counsels  and  commandments,  that  they  have  works 
of  supererogation.  All  these  things,  since  they  are  false  and 
empty,  make  vows  null  and  void. 

Artici^e  XXVIII. 

There  has  been  great  controversy  concerning  the  Power  of 
Bishops,  in  which  some  have  awkwardly  confounded  the  power 
of  the  Church  and  the  power  of  the  sword.  And  from  this  con- 
fusion very  great  wars  and  tumults  have  resulted,  while  the 
Pontiffs,  emboldened  by  the  power  of  the  Keys,  not  only  have 
instituted  new  services  and  burdened  consciences  with  reserva- 
tion of  cases,  but  have  also  undertaken  to  transfer  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world,  and  to  take  the  Empire  from  the  Emperor.  These 
wrongs  have  long  since  been  rebuked  in  the  Church  by  learned 
and  godly  men.  Therefore,  our  teachers,  for  the  comforting  of 
men's  consciences,  were  constrained  to  show  the  difference  be- 
tween the  power  of  the  Church  and  the  power  of  the  sword,  and 
taught  that  both  of  them,  because  of  God's  commandment,^  are  to 
be  held  in  reverence  and  honor,  as  among  the  chief  blessings  of 
God  on  earth. 

But  this  is  their  opinion,  that  the  power  of  the  Keys,  or  the 
power  of  the  bishops,  according  to  the  Gospel,  is  a  power  or 
commandment  of  God,  to  preach  the  Gospel,  to  remit  and  retain 
sins,  and  to  administer  sacraments.  For  with  that  commandment, 
Christ  sends  forth  his  Apostles  [John  20:21  sqq.]  :  "As  my 
Father  has  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  Receive  ye  the  Holy 
Ghost.  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto  them ; 
and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  [Mark  16: 
15]  :  "Go,  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature." 

This  power  is  exercised  only  by  teaching  or  preaching  the 
Gospel  and  administering  the  sacraments,  according  to  the  calling, 
either  to  many  or  to  individuals.  For  thereby  are  granted,  not 
bodily,  but  eternal  things,  as  eternal  righteousness,  the  Holy 
Ghost,  eternal  life.  These  things  cannot  come  but  by  the  min- 
istry of  the  Word  and  the  sacraments.  As  Paul  says  [Rom.  i : 
16]  :  "The  Gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every 
one  that  believeth."  Therefore,  since  the  power  of  the  Church 
grants  eternal  things,  and  is  exercised  only  by  the  ministry  of 
the  Word,  it  does  not  interfere  with  civil  government ;  no  more 
than  the  art  of  singing  interferes  with  civil  government.  For 
civil  government  deals  with  other  things  than  does  the  Gospel; 
the  civil  rulers  defend  not  souls,  but  bodies  and  bodily  things 
against  manifest  injuries,  and  restrain  men  with  the  sword  and 
bodily  punishments  in  order  to  preserve  civil  justice  and  peace. 

Therefore  the  power  of  the  Church  and  the  civil  power  must 
not  be  confounded.  The  power  of  the  Church  has  its  own  com- 
mission, to  teach  the  Gospel  and  to  administer  the  sacraments. 


156  The:  Augsburg  Confession. 

Let  it  not  break  into  the  office  of  another ;  let  it  not  transfer  the 
kingdoms  of  this  world;  let  it  not  abrogate  the  laws  of  civil 
rulers;  let  it  not  aboHsh  lawful  obedience;  let  it  not  interfere 
with  judgments  concerning  civil  ordinances  or  contracts;  let  it 
not  prescribe  laws  to  civil  rulers  concerning  the  form  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. As  Christ  says  [John  18 :  36]  :  "My  kingdom  is  not 
of  this  world";  also  [Luke  12:  14]  "Who  made  me  a  judge  or  a 
divider  over  you?"  Paul  also  says  [Phil.  3:20]:  "Our  citizen- 
ship is  in  Heaven" ;  [2  Cor.  10 :  4]  :  "The  weapons  of  our  war- 
fare are  not  carnal;  but  mighty  through  God  to  the  casting 
down  of  imaginations."  After  this  manner,  our  teachers  dis- 
criminate between  the  duties  of  both  these  powers,  and  com- 
mand that  both  be  honored  and  acknowledged  as  gifts  and  bless- 
ings of  God. 

If  bishops  have  any  power  of  the  sword,  that  power  they  have, 
not  as  bishops,  by  the  commission  of  the  Gospel,  but  by  human 
law,  having  received  it  of  Kings  and  Emperors,  for  the  civil  ad- 
ministration of  what  is  theirs.  This,  however,  is  another  office 
than  the  ministry  of  the  Gospel. 

When,  therefore,  a  question  arises  concerning  the  jurisdiction 
of  bishops,  civil  authority  must  be  distinguished  from  ecclesi- 
astical jurisdiction.  Again,  according  to  the  Gospel,  or,  as  they 
say,  according  to  Divine  Law,  to  the  bishops  as  bishops,  that  is, 
to  those  to  whom  has  been  committed  the  ministry  of  the  Word 
and  the  sacraments,  no  jurisdiction  belongs,  except  to  forgive 
sins,  to  discern  doctrine,  to  reject  doctrines  contrary  to  the 
Gospel,  and  to  exclude  from  the  communion  of  the  Church 
wicked  men,  whose  wickedness  is  known,  and  this  without  human 
force,  simply  by  the  Word.  Herein  the  congregations  are  bound 
by  Divine  Law  to  obey  them,  according  to  Luke  10:  16:  "He  that 
heareth  you,  heareth  me." 

But  when  they  teach  or  ordain  anything  against  the  Gospel, 
then  the  congregations  have  a  commandment  of  God  prohibiting 
obedience  [Matt.  7:  15]  :  "Beware  of  false  prophets";  [Gal.  i :  8]  : 
"Though  an  angel  from  heaven  preach  any  other  Gospel  let  him 
be  accursed" ;  [2  Cor.  13:8]:  "We  can  do  nothing  against  the 
truth ;  but  for  the  truth."  Also  [v.  10]  :  "The  power  which  the 
Lord  hath  given  me  to  edification,  and  not  to  destruction."  So, 
also,  the  Canonical  Laws  command  (H.  Q.  vii.  Cap.  Sacer dotes 
and  Cap.  Oves.)  And  Augustine  {Contra  Petiliani  Bpistolam)  : 
"Not  even  to  Catholic  bishops  must  we  submit,  if  they  chance 
to  err,  or  hold  anything  contrary  to  the  Canonical  Scriptures  of 
God." 

n  they  have  any  other  power  or  jurisdiction,  in  hearing  and 
judging  certain  cases,  as  of  matrimony  or  of  tithes,  they  have  it 
by  human  law.  But  where  the  ordinaries  fail,  princes  are  bound, 
even  against  their  will,  to  dispense  justice  to  their  subjects,  for 
the  maintenance  of  peace. 

Moreover,  it  is  disputed  whether  bishops  or  pastors  have  the 
right  to  introduce  ceremonies  in  the  Church,  and  to  make  laws 
concerning  meats,  holydays  and  degrees,  that  is,  orders  of  min- 


Th^  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  157 

isters,  etc.  They  that  claim  this  right  for  the  bishops,  refer  to 
this  testimony  [John  16:12,  13]:  "I  have  yet  many  things  to 
say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now.  Howbeit  when  he, 
the  Spirit  of  truth  is  come,  he  will  guide  you  into  all  truth." 
They  also  refer  to  the  example  of  the  Apostles,  who  commanded 
to  abstain  from  blood  and  from  things  strangled  [Acts  15:29]. 
They  refer  to  the  Sabbath  Day,  as  having  been  changed  into  the 
Lord's  Day,  contrary  to  the  Decalogue,  as  it  seems.  Neither  is 
there  any  example  whereof  they  make  more  than  concerning  the 
changing  of  the  Sabbath  Day.  Great,  say  they,  is  the  power  of 
the  Church,  since  it  has  dispensed  with  one  of  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments ! 

But,  concerning  this  question,  it  is  taught  on  our  part  (as  has 
been  shown  above),  that  bishops  have  no  power  to  decree  any- 
thing against  the  Gospel.  The  Canonical  laws  teach  the  same 
thing  (Dist.  ix.).  Now  it  is  against  Scripture  to  establish  or  re- 
quire the  observance  of  any  traditions,  to  the  end  that,  by  such 
observance,  we  may  make  satisfaction  for  sins,  or  merit  grace 
and  righteousness.  For  the  glory  of  Christ's  merit  is  dishonored 
when,  by  such  observances,  we  undertake  to  rnerit  justification. 
But  it  is  manifest  that,  by  such  belief,  traditions  have  almost 
infinitely  multiplied  in  the  Church,  the  doctrine  concerning  faith 
and  the' righteousness  of  faith  being  meanwhile  suppressed.  For 
gradually  more  holydays  were  made,  fasts  appointed,  new  cere- 
monies and  services  in  honor  of  saints  instituted;  because  the 
authors  of  such  things  thought  that,  by  these  works,  they  were 
meriting  grace.  Thus,  in  times  past,  the  Penitential  Canons  in- 
creased, whereof  we  still  see  some  traces  in  the  satisfactions. 

Again,  the  authors  of  traditions  do  contrary  to  the  command 
of  God  when  they  find  matters  of  sin  in  foods,  in  days,  and  like 
things,  and  burden  the  Church  with  bondage  of  the  law,  as  if 
there  ought  to  be  among  Christians,  in  order  to  merit  justifica- 
tion, a  service  like  the  Levitical,  the  arrangement  of  which  God 
has  committed  to  the  Apostles  and  bishops.  For  thus  some  of 
them  write ;  and  the  Pontiffs  in  some  measure  seem  to  be  misled 
by  the  example  of  the  law  of  Moses.  Hence  are  such  burdens, 
as  that  they  make  it  mortal  sin,  even  without  offence  to  others, 
to  do  manual  labor  on  holydays,  to  omit  the  Canonical  Hours, 
that  certain  foods  defile  the  conscience,  that  fastings  are  works 
which  appease  God,  that  sin  in  a  reserved  case  cannot  be  for- 
given but  by  the  authority  of  him  who  reserved  it;  whereas  the 
Canons  themselves  speak  only  of  the  reserving  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical penalty,  and  not  of  the  reserving  of  the  guilt. 

Whence  have  the  bishops  the  right  to  lay  these  traditions 
upon  the  Church  for  the  ensnaring  of  consciences,  when  Peter 
[x^cts  15 :  10]  forbids  to  put  a  yoke  upon  the  neck  of  the  dis- 
ciples, and  Paul  says  [2  Cor.  13 :  10]  that  the  power  given  him 
was  to  edification,  not  to  destruction?  Why,  therefore,  do  they 
increase  sins  by  these  traditions? 

But  there  are  clear  testimonies  which  prohibit  the  making  of 
such  traditions,  as  though  they  merited  grace  or  were  necessary 


158  The:  Augsburg  Concession. 

to  salvation.  Paul  says  [Col.  2:  16]  :  *Xet  no  man  judge  you  in 
meat,  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  an  holyday,  or  of  the  new 
moon,  or  of  the  Sabbath  days";  [v.  20,  23]  :  "If  ye  be  dead  with 
Christ  from  the  rudiments  of  the  world,  why,  as  though  living 
in  the  world,  are  ye  subject  to  ordinances  (touch  not;  taste  not; 
handle  not,  which  all  are  to  perish  with  the  using)  ;  after  the 
commandments  and  doctrines  of  men?  which  things  have  indeed 
a  show  of  wisdom."  Also  in  Tit.  [i:  14]  he  openly  forbids  tra- 
ditions :  "Not  giving  heed  to  Jewish  fables  and  comm.andments 
of  men  that  turn  from  the  truth."  And  Christ  [Matt.  15 :  14] 
says  of  those  who  require  traditions:  "Let  them  alone;  they 
be  blind  leaders  of  the  blind";  and  he  rebukes  such  services  [v. 
13]  :  "Every  plant  which  my  Heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted, 
shall  be  plucked  up." 

If  bishops  have  the  right  to  burden  churches  with  infinite  tra- 
ditions, and  to  ensnare  consciences,  why  does  Scripture  so  often 
prohibit  to  make  and  to  listen  to  traditions?  Why  does  it  call 
them  "doctrines  of  devils"?  [i  Tim.  4:1].  Did  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  vain  forewarn  of  these  things? 

Since,  therefore,  ordinances  instituted  as  things  necessary,  or 
with  an  opinion  of  meriting  grace,  are  contrary  to  the  Gospel,  it 
follows  that  it  is  not  lawful  for  any  bishop  to  institute  or  ex- 
act such  services.  For  it  is  necessary  that  the  doctrine  of  Chris- 
tian liberty  be  preserved  in  the  churches,  namely,  that  the  bond- 
age of  the  Law  is  not  necessary  to  justification,  as  it  is  written 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  [5:1]:  "Be  not  entangled  again 
with  the  yoke  of  bondage."  It  is  necessary  that  the  chief  article 
of  the  Gospel  be  preserved,  to  wit,  that  we  obtain  grace  freely 
by  faith  in  Christ,  and  not  for  certain  observances  or  acts  of 
worship  devised  by  men. 

What,  then,  are  we  to  think  of  the  Sunday  and  like  rites  in 
the  house  of  God?  To  this  we  answer,  that  it  is  lawful  for 
bishops  or  pastors  to  make  ordinances  that  things  be  done  or- 
derly in  the  Church,  not  that  thereby  we  should  merit  grace  or 
make  satisfaction  for  sins,  or  that  consciences  be  bound  to  judge 
them  necessary  services,  and  to  think  that  it  is  a  sin  to  break 
them  without  ofifence  to  others.  So  Paul  ordains  [i  Cor.  11:5], 
that  wom.en  should  cover  their  heads  in  the  congregation  [i  Cor. 
14-30],  that  interpreters  of  Scripture  be  heard  in  order  in  the 
Church,  etc. 

It  is  proper  that  the  churches  should  keep  such  ordinances 
for  the  sake  of  charity  and  tranquillity,  so  far  that  one  do  not 
offend  another,  that  all  things  be  done  in  the  churches  in  order, 
and  without  confusion;  but  so  that  consciences  be  not  burdened 
to  think  that  they  be  necessary  to  salvation,  or  to  judge  that  they 
sin  when  they  break  them  without  offence  to  others;  as  no  one 
will  say  that  a  woman  sins  who  goes  out  in  public  with  her  head 
uncovered,  provided  only  that  no  offence  be  given. 

Of  this  kind,  is  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Day,  Easter, 
Pentecost,  and  like  holydays  and  rites.  For  those  who  judge 
that,  by  the  authority  of  the   Church,   the  observaRce   of   the 


The  Augsburg  Coni^ession.  159 

Lord's  Day  instead  of  the  Sabbath  Day  was  ordained  as  a  thing 
necessary,  do  greatly  err.  Scripture  has  abrogated  the  Sabbath 
Day;  for  it  teaches  that,  since  the  Gospel  has  been  revealed,  all 
the  ceremonies  of  Moses  can  be  omitted.  And  yet,  because  it  was 
necessary  to  appoint  a  certain  day,  that  the  people  might  know 
when  they  ought  to  come  together,  it  appears  that  the  Church 
[the  Apostles]  designated  the  Lord's  Day  for  this  purpose;  and 
this  day  seems  to  have  been  chosen  all  the  more  for  this  addi- 
tional reason,  that  men  might  have  an  example  of  Christian  lib- 
erty, and  might  know  that  the  keeping  neither  of  the  Sabbath, 
nor  of  any  other  day,  is  necessary. 

There  are  monstrous  disputations  concerning  the  changing  of 
the  law,  the  ceremonies  of  the  new  law,  the  changing  of  the 
Sabbath  Day,  which  all  have  sprung  from  the  false  belief  that 
there  must  needs  be  in  the  Church  a  service  like  to  the  Levitical, 
and  that  Christ  had  given  commission  to  the  Apostles  and 
bishops  to  devise  new  ceremonies  as  necessary  to  salvation. 
These  errors  crept  into  the  Church  when  the  righteousness  of 
faith  was  not  clearly  enough  taught.  Some  dispute  that  the 
keeping  of  the  Lord's  Day  is  not  indeed  of  divine  right;  but  in 
a  manner  so.  They  prescribe  concerning  holydays,  how  far  it  is 
lawful  to  work.  What  else  are  such  disputations  but  snares  of 
consciences?  For  although  they  endeavor  to  modify  the  tradi- 
tions, yet  the  equity  can  never  be  perceived  as  long  as  the  opinion 
remains  that  they  are  necessary,  which  must  needs  remain  where 
the  righteousness  of  faith  and  Christian  liberty  are  disregarded. 

The  Apostles  commanded  to  abstain  from  blood.  Who  doth 
now  observe  it?  And  yet  they  that  do  it  not,  sin  not;  for  not 
even  the  Apostles  themselves  wanted  to  burden  consciences  with 
such  bondage ;  but  they  forbade  it  for  a  time,  to  avoid  offence. 
For,  in  any  decree,  we  must  perpetually  consider  what  is  the  aim 
of  the  Gospel.  Scarcely  any  Canons  are  kept  with  exactness, 
and,  from  day  to  day,  many  go  out  of  use  even  with  those  who 
are  the  most  zealous  advocates  of  traditions.  Neither  can  due 
regard  be  paid  to  consciences  unless  this  equity  be  observed,  that 
we  know  that  the  Canons  are  kept  without  holding  them  to  be 
necessary,  and  that  no  harm  is  done  consciences,  even  though  tra- 
ditions go  out  of  use. 

But  the  bishops  might  easily  retain  the  lawful  obedience  of  the 
people,  if  they  would  not  insist  upon  the  observance  of  such  tra- 
ditions as  cannot  be  kept  with  a  good  conscience.  Now  they 
command  celibacy;  they  admit  none,  unless  they  swear  that  they 
will  not  teach  the  pure  doctrine  of  the  Gospel.  The  churches  do 
not  ask  that  the  bishops  should  restore  concord  at  the  expense 
of  their  honor;  which,  nevertheless,  it  would  be  proper  for  good 
pastors  to  do.  They  ask  only  that  they  would  release  unjust 
burdens  which  are  new  and  have  been  received  contrary  to  the 
custom  of  the  Church  Catholic.  It  may  be  that  there  were 
plausible  reasons  for  some  of  these  ordinances ;  and  yet  they  are 
not  adapted  to  later  times.  It  is  also  evident  that  some  were 
adopted  through  erroneous  conceptions.    Therefore,  it  would  be 


i6o  Th^  Augsburg  Confession. 

befitting  the  clemency  of  the  Pontiffs  to  mitigate  them  now;  be- 
cause such  a  modification  does  not  shake  the  unity  of  the  Church. 
For  many  human  traditions  have  been  changed  in  process  of 
time,  as  the  Canons  themselves  show.  But  if  it  be  impossible  to 
obtain  a  mitigation  of  such  observances  as  cannot  be  kept  with- 
out sin,  we  are  bound  to  follow  the  Apostolic  rule  [Acts  5:  29], 
which  commands  us  to  obey  God  rather  than  men.  Peter  [i 
Pet.  5 : 3]  forbids  bishops  to  be  lords,  and  to  rule  over  the 
churches.  Now  it  is  not  our  design  to  wrest  the  government 
from  the  bishops,  but  this  one  thing  is  asked,  namely,  that  they 
allow  the  Gospel  to  be  purely  taught,  and  that  they  relax  some 
few  observances  which  cannot  be  kept  without  sin.  But  if  they 
make  no  concession,  it  is  for  them  to  see  how  they  shall  give 
account  to  God  for  having,  by  their  obstinacy,  caused  a  schism. 


Conclusion. 

These  are  the  Chief  Articles  which  seem  to  be  in  controversy. 
For  although  we  might  have  spoken  of  more  Abuses,  yet  to 
avoid  undue  length,  we  have  set  forth  the  chief  points,  from  which 
the  rest  may  be  readily  judged.  _  There  have  been  great  com- 
plaints concerning  indulgences,  pilgrimages,  and  the  abuses  of 
excommunications.  The  parishes  have  been  vexed  in  many  ways 
by  the  dealers  in  indulgences.  There  were  endless  contentions 
between  the  pastors  and  the  monks  concerning  the  parochial  rites, 
confessions,  burials,  sermons  on  extraordinary  occasions,  and  in- 
numerable other  things.  Things  of  this  sort  we  have  passed 
over,  so  that  the  chief  points  in  this  matter,  having  been  briefly 
set  forth,  might  be  the  most  readily  understood.  Nor  has  any- 
thing been  here  said  or  adduced  to  the  reproach  of  anyone.  Only 
those  things  have  been  recounted,  whereof  we  thought  that  it 
was  necessary  to  speak,  so  that  it  might  be  understood  that,  in 
doctrine  and  ceremonies,  nothing  has  been  received  on  our  part, 
against  Scripture  or  the  Church  Catholic,  since  it  is  manifest 
that  we  have  taken  most  diligent  care  that  no  new  and  ungodly 
doctrine  should  creep  into  our  churches. 

The  above  articles  we  desire  to  present  in  accordance  with  the 
edict  of  Your  Irnperial  Majesty,  so  that  our  Confession  should 
therein  be  exhibited,  and  a  summary  of  the  doctrine  of  our 
teachers  might  be  discerned.  If  anything  further  be  desired,  we 
are  ready,  God  willing,  to  present  ampler  information  according 
to  the  Scriptures. 

John,  Duke  of  Saxony,  Elector. 

George,  Margrave  of  Brandenburg. 

Ernest,  Duke  of  Liineburg. 

Philip,  Landgrave  of  Hesse. 

John  Frederick,  Duke  of  Saxony. 

Francis,  Duke  of  Liineburg. 

Wolegang,  Prince  of  Anhalt. 

Senate  and  Magistracy  of  Nuremburg. 

Senate  of  Reutlingen. 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0035519835 


:  r-* 


BRITTI P  DO  NOT 
PHOTOCOPY 


•  CM 

ON     2: 


